From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Jun 20 19:08:23 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 TAA07352 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:08:22 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id TAA03809 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:07:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:07:18 -0500 Message-Id: <200006210007.TAA03809@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 #1686 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 1686 In this digest: Re: IN> Seedpack Re: IN> Seedpack IN> Fwd: "Morgan Bluejeans" Re: IN> Word of Mouth (Re: GURPS IN Canon (loooong)) IN> IN PBEM resource Re: IN> Seedpack Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) Re: IN> Seedpack Re: IN> Seedpack Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon IN> Celestial Form Idea, Wind and Theft Dissonance Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) Fwd: Re: IN> A basic problem: No players or games in an area Re: IN> Celestial Form Idea, Wind and Theft Dissonance Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon RE: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) RE: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) IN> Sup4 cover (Re: GURPS IN Canon) Re: IN> Celestial Form Idea, Wind and Theft Dissonance Fwd: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) IN> IN at Conventions (was: Collecting vs. playing...) Re: IN> A basic problem: No players or games in an area Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:39:09 -0400 From: Marc Bowden Subject: Re: IN> Seedpack - --On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 11:21 AM +0000 Jo Hart wrote: > > > >> 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. > What worked for WW was having a subculture to velcro itself to. Marc. Just Marc. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 09:13:52 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" 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 Agreed, and people *still* bought them. While I would hope that IN will aim for artistic quality the bottom line is sales. And the they _were_ nicely written and told a great story which seems to be why half the people (well not that high) bought them anyways. The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:41:27 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Fwd: "Morgan Bluejeans" Remember to s u b scribe your other addresses that you might post from to the in-nomine-posters-l list! >From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 11:00:05 -0500 >To: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Non-member submission from ["Morgan Bluejeans" ] >From: "Morgan Bluejeans" >Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:59:29 PDT > >>>All right, so the timing doesn't work for *everyone.* >>> >> >>Don't worry. It's bound to be late :P > >Of all the things there are to love about you, Jo, your optimism is the >first on the list. :) > > >Ben >________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:17:15 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Word of Mouth (Re: GURPS IN Canon (loooong)) At 12:38 AM -0700 6/20/00, O. S. Kerr wrote: >> > > Word of Mouth... think what might happen with a little >> > > _publicity._ >> > >> >How many Word Forces is that worth? :-) > >*sigh* > >No one even mentioned Andre... > >Andre would be *very* good to the Demon of Mouth... > > >;> I am _so_ not going there. (Cracking up, yes. Going there? Oh- no-no-no-no...) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:26:45 PDT From: "Janet Anderson" Subject: IN> IN PBEM resource Yes, definitely I would be interested. Janet Anderson ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 11:51:15 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" 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. > > > > What worked for WW was having a subculture to velcro itself to. Well that certainly helped a massive amount but I sold alot of WW to non-angst-ridden, non-goth types also... And they all bought it because the writing was good and the setting was different and the game engine was actually rather innovative (I make no judgements as to good... and neither should anyone else who plays IN). What WW did was make RPG'ing "cool" and not the refuge of the nerds of my generation (or the generation before me) and bring a whole bunch of new blood (I couldn't resist ) into the base population of gamers. The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 07:34:34 -0700 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) Whistling in the Dark wrote: > (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.) That or you were channelling some random Australian. It's a reasonably common word over here. When you start using 'dodgy' in your writing, you'll know the transformation into an Antipodean is complete. Mate. > 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. Well, apart from that mess with Fleurity. Don't know what was wrong with me that week. Still have to apologise some more to Emily Dresner for that. > 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. You're weird, Eric. - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia It's been a long hard day scaring the shit out of children for the anticlowns of the Tolerable Terror Infant Therapy Institute. - Spider Jerusalem, TRANSMETROPOLITAN #23 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 17:35:10 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) At 7:34 AM -0700 6/21/00, Patrick O'Duffy wrote: >Whistling in the Dark wrote: > >> (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.) > >That or you were channelling some random Australian. It's a >reasonably common word >over here. > >When you start using 'dodgy' in your writing, you'll know the >transformation into >an Antipodean is complete. Mate. But... I've done that for years.... > > 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. > >Well, apart from that mess with Fleurity. Don't know what was wrong >with me that week. Still have to apologise some more to Emily >Dresner for that. > [...] >You're weird, Eric. That was never in question. - -- - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:40:16 PDT From: "Jo Hart" Subject: Re: IN> Seedpack >From: "David Rodemaker" > > What worked for WW was having a subculture to velcro itself to. > >Well that certainly helped a massive amount but I sold alot of WW to >non-angst-ridden, non-goth types also... And they all bought it because the >writing was good and the setting was different and the game engine was >actually rather innovative (I make no judgements as to good... and neither >should anyone else who plays IN). Hey, I really like Vampire. I played it solidly for years and built a MUSH around it. I don't have anything against WW. But every official published _scenario_ I have read for their games has been deeply flawed, IMO. jo ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:18:43 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> Seedpack > > > What worked for WW was having a subculture to velcro itself to. > > > >Well that certainly helped a massive amount but I sold alot of WW to > >non-angst-ridden, non-goth types also... And they all bought it because the > >writing was good and the setting was different and the game engine was > >actually rather innovative (I make no judgements as to good... and neither > >should anyone else who plays IN). > > Hey, I really like Vampire. I played it solidly for years and built a MUSH > around it. I don't have anything against WW. > > But every official published _scenario_ I have read for their games has been > deeply flawed, IMO. You mean Berlin by Night or either of the Diabalrie adventures didn't strike you as remotely resembling balanced. Or the really good Circus or Carnival or whatever it was? (memory fails). IN isn't doing much better and might not be doing any better if I looked too closely but WW is great if you don't use thier adventures. Rather like IN... The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 20:01:56 +0100 From: Dave Taylor Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon In article , Whistling in the Dark wrote: > -- I've seduced a number of people into In Nomine with my > descriptions and enthusiasm. In the past month, I have seduced no less than _15_ people (including hardcore GW players and utter newbies) to IN, and have started dropping hints about the 6 or so rulebooks in various stores in liverpool. Word is spreading, and there are a lot of other people interested. This to me does not sound like a Failed Line. in every case they have overheard me discussing it or seen me reading one of the books and the ensuing conversation starts something like this: Victim: "what's this In Nomine thing you're talking about?" Me: "its a roleplay game, where you can play as either angels or demons" Victim: "that sounds cool! so what can these demons/angels do..." 15 minutes later, they're mine (Mwahahahahahaha) Dave Balseraph Knight of Fate, Demon of Seducing People Into In Nomine (Emulating Mercurian Resonance) - -- Long is the way, and hard, that out of Hell leads up to light - John Milton - Paradise Lost ICQ - 77214006 - Archangel Nine ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:13:19 +0100 From: Dave Taylor Subject: IN> Celestial Form Idea, Wind and Theft Dissonance just a few ideas i've been rolling round my head 1: 'Fixing' Celestial Song of Form Celestial form enables the user to mold their vessel. But it only lasts for CDxCelForces Rnds. OPTION: On a CD of 6+, and a successful Will roll, the singer may 'fix' the change for Cel Forces _Days_. During this time however, further aplications of Cel Form fail automatically. I use this idea a lot, but the best example came during a campaign where an Elohite of flowers was to impersonate an environmentally unfriendly politician for a short period of time (long enough to impede a congress bill that threatened a flowers tether) As it turned out, the Will roll 111'd and I decided to make the fix permanent, and gave the Elohite a Role/4 as the politician in question. The real Politician's body was found 200 miles away, burnt beyond recognition, and never identified, thanks to the Ofanite of Fire in the party. :) 2: Wind and Theft Dissonance Frankly, they suck if running a reasonably static campaign. these are what I use instead: Wind - It is dissonant for servitors of the wind to go a period of Eth Forces days without causing a significant _Beneficial_ change in a mortal's life. (higher level servitors may have a longer interval, but are usually required to perform greater acts of change) Theft - It is dissonant for servitors of theft to fail to steal goods worth Corp Forces x $10 each day, or to pass up the chance to steal any unsecured valuable (such as an unlocked car with the keys in the ignition and engine running) Much more satisfactory, and it makes theft demons real kleptomaniacs, and wind a more positive force for good. comments welcome Dave, - -- Long is the way, and hard, that out of Hell leads up to light - John Milton - Paradise Lost ICQ - 77214006 - Archangel Nine ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:47:57 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) At 7:05 PM -0500 6/19/00, Michael Neal wrote: >You're missing my point. You can list the various reasons why each of these >delays and snafus happened. In the end, though, the important part is that >they *did* happen. Not one of them. Not a couple of them. *All* of them. >That's not Murphy's Law, that's a pattern. And the pattern is that almost >nothing for this game system is on time, or even close. That's not true. You're looking at four things -- mainbook, GIN, 2nd ed, and the Grig Payoff. You're not looking at the Cycle books (which 4 out of 5 were not late, even though maybe they should have been), the Liber books, You Are Here, the Superiors books, the APG, the IPG, the CPG... Maybe the morale is not to announce things -- it draws hostile Intervention. The little guys here cane out with little fanfare, and often not much in the way of problems. (And, might I add, the schedule on at least one of those was _moved up_ while it was in the first draft stage, and I _still_ got it in within a week of the advanced schedule.) GIN is late because better good than Tuesday. So, for that matter, is the Payoff, in part. (Yes, the outline for it has undergone at least one major revision.) The main book was another "better good than Tuesday," and I'd still like to know what they were smoking with the organization... (Truth be told, it's not _that_ bad in some areas; it's just that the areas where it is bad are pretty annoying. And, fronm working on GIN, it has to be said that such an _intricate_ setting is _really_ difficult to make work in any coherent way.) > The pattern is >that, for whatever reason, a lot of stuff that has come out for this line >has been of a significantly lower quality than it ought to have been. Once >or twice is coincidence; the track record of In Nomine is *not* coincidence. >It's a case study in how not to produce and market a game. Which stuff? The Cycle books? Sure. Every other book? Well, the APG, sure, you all know what I think about it. But the IPG is much better, and the Libers are better still, and the Superior books aren't half bad -- are they? >Given the number of GURPS people I know who I have unsuccessfully tried to >hook on In Nomine, I'd bet that even 1% is overly optimistic. I won't bet either way -- but were you trying to hook them on the system or the setting? (For instance; normally, I would not touch White Wolf stuff with a ten-foot-pole. I hate the mechanics of the system and spent most of my WW oneshot experience rolling dice and letting other people tell me what they meant. But I rather liked the GURPS conversions...) I'll bet that most hard-core GURPS-heads are going to HATE the system like crazy -- it's vague, granular, doesn't have different costsbased on usefulness... I'm not surprise you had a hard time hooking them. It's a minor miracle _I_ was hooked -- I was prepared not to be, since I was previously a die-hard GURPS fanatic. The question is whether a successful 'port will get that 1%. Or even that .5%. Look, ye, Andrew hath spake unto us and people are buying the bundles... >> Allow me to put it this way -- it's gonna live on if I have to find >> some way to _fund_ the blighter my own personal self. [...] > >If that happens, let me know, because I might be able to chip in on this. >*I* love the game enough that I'd probably do so, if I can. But my gut says >that that's what we'll have to do, eventually. Here, have some peptol bismol. I don't think it'll be that bad. >My gut also tells me that this is the sort of death spiral from which IN >will never recover. For whatever reason, SJG might hold on to the license >and release a book every 4-6 months, but once the line starts getting pared >back like this, I don't think it's going to be able to elbow its way to >enough shelf space in stores to fight its way back. This is what remains to be seen. Mind, with y'all moping around here like Cassandra... (Elephants? _Elephants_? What makes you think I'll use elephants? I'll use the fuzz-factory cat as soon as her fur grows back. She'll drown everyone in fuzz and I will REIGN SUPREME! MUWHAHAHAHA! ) At 12:34 AM +0100 6/20/00, Omentide wrote: >There's also other ways of doing supplements. I already said that I >dislike 'new canon'. New canon tends to undermine GM creativity. Maybe I >already have a fairly firm idea of how a particular Superior works. A >Superior book comes out and flatly contradicts my conception. Where does >that leave me? One of the few people who doesn't like them -- Superior books were, for a time, THE most-asked-for expansion to the line. (Often in the form of "one AA, one DP" instead of the 4-6 format we went with. At least this way, if you pick up a book, there are 3-5 chances of finding something you _love_...) (Out of sheer curiosity, which one(s) did this happen with? Or is this hypothetical?) As for the rest.... I need to talk to some people. One of those, "don't have control of the schedule" things again. You have scenerios? I think I need to get in touch with Control sometime when I can actually think instead of be a baby-couch... As for rules-lawyers, a quick, "We're using these rules, 'cause they're the ones I have and like, and anything else I may well make up wholecloth" at the beginning of a game (or something compressed in a game entry in a conbook) -- and then you can say, "The Line Editor says that con GMs and MiBs can run the game this way, and you should be nice to them." Send me an address and I'll print out a certificate and sign it. (If The Rules Are Absolute, then She Who Approves The Rules gets to Make Rules To Get Around Rules, no?) At 7:50 PM -0500 6/19/00, Kiara S. Legner wrote: >I already promised you I'd go through all the flavortext and let you know >what I thought of it. Gracias. Didn't register first time, I guess. And I _do_ hope you like it. (No, really, that's ink, not my blood on the pages...) The organization for it is something I'm pondering as a 2/e thing, or somethign close. - ---- General comment, re voting with dollars. For gods' sake, don't buy somethng you don't want. However, do buy the things you do want, instead of bemoaning that the line is dead, why bother. (Which is kind of what the general tone in here may have been suggesting to some impressionable people oh my what is this razor doing in my hands....) - --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, 20 Jun 2000 18:54:19 -0400 From: "Galen G. Silversmith" Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) > One of the few people who doesn't like them -- Superior books were, for > a time, THE most-asked-for expansion to the line. (Often in the form > of "one AA, one DP" instead of the 4-6 format we went with. At least > this way, if you pick up a book, there are 3-5 chances of finding something > you _love_...) (Out of sheer curiosity, which one(s) did this happen > with? Or is this hypothetical?) Having only gotten one of the superior books so far, as thats all I can find in this area (admittedly, I've not looked in favor of my budget, for a few weeks), I have to say that while I don't mind the 4-6 superiors per book, I think it would have worked better if they were presented in the same way as in the Cycle books. I think I would find a book of 4 superiors, AAs and their DP opposing numbers. While this way does give an feel for the different alliances and collitions on each side, I generally find the rivals to be more useful, as if I'm featuring one heavily, their rival will most likely want to be invovled as well. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:09:59 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Fwd: Re: IN> A basic problem: No players or games in an area Remember to s u b s c r i b e your addresses to in_nomine_posters-l... >From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:32:12 -0500 >To: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Non-member submission from ["John J. Maurer, Esq." ] >From: "John J. Maurer, Esq." >Cc: >Subject: Re: IN> A basic problem: No players or games in an area >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:28:05 -0400 > >-----Original Message----- >From: Janet Anderson >To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Cc: moelane_1999@yahoo.com >Date: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 1:18 PM >Subject: IN> A basic problem: No players or games in an area > > >>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. >>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? > > >All right, Janet (and others), I am willing to run an IN Nomine PBEM. There >are a few things: > >1) I am an attorney and father of a two year old RL and I do not have the >free time I did back in college. I can probably only PROMISE I will respond >1ce a week. if it is something simple I can answer at work (like I am now) >but if it requires me to peruse my books and write more than a paragraph or >two, it may have to wait until a weekend. > >2) Characters must be standard starting characters. Angels preferred, but I >would be willing to run a demon character. Mortals/Undead/Remnants are also >on an approval basis. > >3) I would be willing to accept up to 8 players > >Happy now? ;) > >Speaks > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:29:59 -0600 From: "ben" Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Form Idea, Wind and Theft Dissonance > Celestial form enables the user to mold their vessel. But it only lasts > for CDxCelForces Rnds. You could always use the Song of Possession, or bring along a Kyriotate/Shedite, if the Song of Form is too short. > 2: Wind and Theft Dissonance > Frankly, they suck if running a reasonably static campaign. "Doctor, it hurts when I do this!" :-) At first, when I looked at the Windies and the Thefties, I thought, huh, how can you *play* them if you have to stay in the same place? And then I realized that they were meant for campaigns that moved around a lot. If you wanna play an angel who is static, take a Superior who likes Servitors to build themselves up in one location > Much more satisfactory, and it makes theft demons real kleptomaniacs, and > wind a more positive force for good. I *do* like your alternate dissonance requirements, though; I just think that Janus and Valefor are meant for games built around journeys, and changing those dissonance requirements changes them. I bet Windies who don't make good change and Thefties who don't steal get in trouble with their bosses anyway... > Dave, I was about to post something witty about "Devil's Advocacy", and then I thought, wouldn't it be cool if there really *was* a Devil's Advocate -- Lucifer's attorney? Someone should write him up. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:23:01 -0500 From: Andrew Hackard Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon At 08:01 AM 20/06/00 -0400, 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. :) We aim to please. If you'll tell us your further travel plans, we can fit the IN release schedule around them . . . :-) - -- "People are stupider than anybody." | hackard@io.com -- Tom Lehrer | AIM: Talthybias | ICQ: 19083015 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:03:15 -0500 From: "Kiara S. Legner" Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) >>I've written summaries of the rules to hand to players to avoid showing them the main book.<< ROFL! I'm in the process of doing the same thing... but my players all have the main book. It's more because *I'm* tired of having to look stuff up in something that's so difficult to follow. Kiara ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:24:45 -0500 From: Andrew Hackard Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon At 09:29 AM 20/06/00 -0400, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >Well, at least we should get to see cover art between now and then. >Theoretically. Yes, because the cover art is pretty much done. I'd describe it, but I can't do it justice. All I'll say is that it features Vapula quite prominently, along with several of his soldiers. - -- "People are stupider than anybody." | hackard@io.com -- Tom Lehrer | AIM: Talthybias | ICQ: 19083015 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:30:30 -0500 From: Andrew Hackard Subject: RE: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) At 10:19 AM 20/06/00 -0700, Steven Feldon wrote: >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. They wouldn't be significantly cheaper, because the printing just isn't all that much of what the book costs. The art costs -- the writing and editing and layout time costs -- and the conversion to PDF would cost. (Not to mention that these would be HUGE files.) Before someone says, "Skimp on the art to save space," that's not going to happen. SJ would never go for it. If he's not happy with the overall look of the book -- and art is a big part of that -- he's not going to release it. - -- "People are stupider than anybody." | hackard@io.com -- Tom Lehrer | AIM: Talthybias | ICQ: 19083015 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 20:03:00 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) At 6:54 PM -0400 6/20/00, Galen G. Silversmith wrote: >Having only gotten one of the superior books so far, as thats all I can >find in this area (admittedly, I've not looked in favor of my budget, for a >few weeks), (Alack, alas. O:> Which one did you get?) >I think I would find a book of 4 >superiors, AAs and their DP opposing numbers. This format might be more useful for GMs, but players seemed better served by having the Superiors grouped by "theme" -- for the most part, it seemed that someone who wanted to play an X might also be interested in playing a Y. Also, some of the so-called "opposites" didn't oppose very well -- look at Haagenti and Jordi, for instance, and I've never really been able to figure out the Saminga/Laurence thing. Not to mention trying to fit the frabbishnabber minor Superiors into such a model! (Look at it as a feature, not a bug -- this way the players who might pick up the book can't get the low-down on the opposite- side rivals as well...) Still... Ah, for the day when everyone has a book-reader and it would be viable to sell Superiors one at a time so everyone could cherry-pick their own. - --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, 20 Jun 2000 16:47:26 -0700 From: Steven Feldon Subject: RE: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) Hrrm. Someone actually posted some numbers to the list a couple months ago that detailed the printing as well over fifty percent of the cost, I thought. If I was wrong, no biggie: it's not that satisfying an idea anyway. But it _also_ make you the only distributor, and you get the cash that would otherwise have been going to the retailer, what there is of it. Nobody's asking you to put out just ugly reams of raw text. Nobody would like to read that. However, they don't have to be giant files. Palm Computing's documentation is seven hundred pages, and zipped, it's 1.13 meg. And yes, there's art. That's not small, but neither is it out of consideration for a 56k modem. . . . steve - -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Hackard [mailto:hackard@io.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 3:31 PM To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Subject: RE: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong, quoting several folks) At 10:19 AM 20/06/00 -0700, Steven Feldon wrote: >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. They wouldn't be significantly cheaper, because the printing just isn't all that much of what the book costs. The art costs -- the writing and editing and layout time costs -- and the conversion to PDF would cost. (Not to mention that these would be HUGE files.) Before someone says, "Skimp on the art to save space," that's not going to happen. SJ would never go for it. If he's not happy with the overall look of the book -- and art is a big part of that -- he's not going to release it. - -- "People are stupider than anybody." | hackard@io.com -- Tom Lehrer | AIM: Talthybias | ICQ: 19083015 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 20:05:16 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Sup4 cover (Re: GURPS IN Canon) At 5:24 PM -0500 6/20/00, Andrew Hackard wrote: >At 09:29 AM 20/06/00 -0400, Whistling in the Dark wrote: >>Well, at least we should get to see cover art between now and then. >>Theoretically. > >Yes, because the cover art is pretty much done. I'd describe it, but I >can't do it justice. All I'll say is that it features Vapula quite >prominently, along with several of his soldiers. Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! Can you give us a heads-up when it's on the web-page? (I'm usually the _last_ to know, unless I happen to be haunting the site.) - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:51:29 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Celestial Form Idea, Wind and Theft Dissonance At 5:29 PM -0600 6/20/00, ben wrote: > > >I was about to post something witty about "Devil's Advocacy", and then I >thought, wouldn't it be cool if there really *was* a Devil's Advocate -- >Lucifer's attorney? Someone should write him up. > >Ben David has the next best thing on his website.... - -- - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 20:06:46 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Fwd: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) And the usual about s u b s c r i b i n g (ask me how if needbe!) to the in_nomine_posters-l from all your email addresses that you might post from. >From: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:42:38 -0500 >To: owner-in_nomine-l@lists.io.com >Subject: BOUNCE in_nomine-l@lists.io.com: Non-member submission from [Elizabeth Bartley ] >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:39:37 >From: Elizabeth Bartley >Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) > >At 06:54 PM 6/20/00 -0400, you wrote: > >>Having only gotten one of the superior books so far, as thats all I can >>find in this area (admittedly, I've not looked in favor of my budget, for a >>few weeks), I have to say that while I don't mind the 4-6 superiors per >>book, I think it would have worked better if they were presented in the >>same way as in the Cycle books. I think I would find a book of 4 >>superiors, AAs and their DP opposing numbers. While this way does give an >>feel for the different alliances and collitions on each side, I generally >>find the rivals to be more useful, as if I'm featuring one heavily, their >>rival will most likely want to be invovled as well. > >I think a significant chunk of the IN market only wants to buy the Archangel >books, or only the Prince books. GMs would want both if they have the cash, >but if cost is an issue GMs running angel campaigns would want to buy the >Archangel books first before Prince books, and vice-versa for those running >demon campaigns. The effect would be even more pronounced for players.... >And if I were GMing, I would much prefer that PCs running angels *not* read >up on the details of Demon Princes, their hierarchies, etc. If I GMed a >demon campaign, which I doubt I would, I'd feel even more strongly; demons >have been systematically propagandized, most don't *know* this stuff. > >Plus, starting with four Superiors per book makes it easier to slip in minor >Superiors without needing to find an opposite number, allot space for both, >et cetera. > >And some opposites are more important than others. Yes, I can see the sense >in putting Blandine and Beleth in the same book; likewise Yves and Kronos and >Michael and Baal and Dominic and Asmodeus. But not all of the Archangels and >Princes are so neatly matched. When all is said and done, Laurence primarily >opposes Saminga (or so it is listed in the main rules,) but Saminga just isn't >as important to Laurence as Michael and Dominic are. In fact, judging from >Laurence's opinions, he seems to be as ready to oppose Beleth, Belial, >Malphus, >and Valefor as much as Saminga. > > - Elizabeth Bartley > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:28:46 -0400 From: Andrew Dawson Subject: IN> IN at Conventions (was: Collecting vs. playing...) At 07:26 AM 06/20/2000 -0700, Robert Knop wrote: >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. The word limit is generally too short for a lot of detail. I often use the following phrases in my descriptions unless I am lucky enough to be at a con where the game listing includes some of these details: "Beginners welcome.", "Characters provided.", and "Roleplaying emphasized." During the game I point out that my adventure was created using only the main rulebook. (This lets the players know that they don't need to buy a pile of books to play.) Here is a description from the game that I am running this weekend: In Nomine "Bring 'Em Back Alive", 6 players, beginners welcome, Andy Dawson You're an angelic squad trying to keep the streets clean of demons, but this time you need to bring one in alive. Characters provided. This is pushing the word limit that I had to work with. The adventure itself consists of nine pregenerated characters, a couple of pregenerated NPCs, and two somewhat-planned scenes. The game starts with a short intro (about a 1/2 hour); handouts for the players detailing choirs, bands, and superiors; character selection and individual ability explanation; and playing time (about 3 hours, sometimes a little more). The time slots are generally four hours long and I've found that double time slot games rarely work at cons. Later, Andy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:33:44 -0400 From: Andrew Dawson Subject: Re: IN> A basic problem: No players or games in an area At 10:17 AM 06/20/2000 -0700, Janet Anderson wrote: >As per earlier suggestions, I tried the SJ Games Gamefinder. It did not >find a game in New Jersey. I suggest that you go to Shorecon this fall and look for the In Nomine players there. If any of the same crowd that I played with are there, you may be able to find some good IN players in your neck of the woods. Frantically trying to lower the spam quotient for everyone else: Try your local cons and if no one is running an IN game, run one and see who shows up. I have met most of my current RPG groups (2 games currently running with possibilities for 3 more) through gaming cons and I've only been in Michigan a little longer than a year. Later, Andy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:39:40 -0400 From: Andrew Dawson Subject: Re: IN> Sad Fall of In Nomine (was: GURPS IN Canon) At 04:13 PM 06/20/2000 -0700, Patrick O'Duffy wrote: >Andrew Dawson wrote: >> 5. Vote with your cash. >Actually, this 'advice' kinda annoys me. Well, you can't please everyone all of time and that seems to be doubly true on mailing lists. This was free advice and for you it was worth every penny. Do I need to put huge disclaimers in every message that this is advice and that you are in no way constrained to take it to heart or agree with it? In an effort to pull this back to IN, here is some more advice, none of it new or universally acceptable: 7. Write for or about In Nomine where potential fans will see it (articles, reviews, etc.). 8. Write some short, easy-to-use In Nomine adventures and give them to SJ Games to display prominently on their website. If adventures don't sell, maybe free adventures are still a good idea. Later, Andy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:54:36 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> GURPS IN Canon (loooong) At 8:03 PM -0400 6/20/00, Elizabeth McCoy wrote: >At 6:54 PM -0400 6/20/00, Galen G. Silversmith wrote: > >Not to mention trying to fit the frabbishnabber minor Superiors into >such a model! Litheroy/Alaemon, Zadkiel/Furfur, Christopher/Mammon, Khalid/Magog. Glad to be of help. (I am *so* dead...) - -- - -- Eric Alfred Burns - Habbalite of Belaboring the Point ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1686 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.