Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Travis Phillips tmphill@******.com
Subject: A Few Questions
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 17:08:34 -0600
I've had a few questions come up lately that I could use some opinions
on:

1. I send a team on a run and hit an Elite Security Mage. My opponent
frags a card to send my runner holding the Maglocks Passkey home. I
defeat that challenge and run into Maglocks. I guess wrong and go
home. Since someone on the team was holding the Bulldog Van, I want to
send my team again against the Maglocks. Do y'all think that I can send
the holder of the Passkey on this second run even though he was sent
home prior to the rest of the team?


2. I grab The Vault and before I have made a decision of rep or nuyen,
my opponent plays False Mentor. I think that I can choose to take nuyen
and he can't do anything, and if I choose to take the rep, he can only
take the rep and not convert it to nuyen. He hadn't read the card
(Mentor) and had been under the impression that he could take the
objective and then convert it to nuyen. I actually let him do this
because I was winning by a large margin, but I'm sure I'm right on
this. One question I do have is this: Say I take Roboplant Revolt with
a gang of deckers. My opponent Mentors me and grabs the rep but I think
that despite the fact that Mentor says the "opponent recieves nothing,"
I will still get the nuyen bonus from the objective, just no rep. It
seems to me that that wording on the card is supposed to be more of
'Nya, Nya' than a literal usage. At least in my mind, the reciept of
the bonus and the reciept of the rep are two seperate things.
Similarly, if I take The Initiation with a bunch of runners and my
opponent take the rep, I think that the runners who took it will still
become gangers. Any opinions?

Thanks,

Travis
Message no. 2
From: David Reis david.reis@*****.com
Subject: A Few Questions
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 22:45:52 -0700
At 05:08 PM 5/14/99 -0600, Travis Phillips <tmphill@******.com> wrote:
>I've had a few questions come up lately that I could use some opinions
>on:
>
>1. I send a team on a run and hit an Elite Security Mage. My opponent
>frags a card to send my runner holding the Maglocks Passkey home. I
>defeat that challenge and run into Maglocks. I guess wrong and go
>home. Since someone on the team was holding the Bulldog Van, I want to
>send my team again against the Maglocks. Do y'all think that I can send
>the holder of the Passkey on this second run even though he was sent
>home prior to the rest of the team?
>
>
>2. I grab The Vault and before I have made a decision of rep or nuyen,
>my opponent plays False Mentor. I think that I can choose to take nuyen
>and he can't do anything, and if I choose to take the rep, he can only
>take the rep and not convert it to nuyen. He hadn't read the card
>(Mentor) and had been under the impression that he could take the
>objective and then convert it to nuyen. I actually let him do this
>because I was winning by a large margin, but I'm sure I'm right on
>this. One question I do have is this: Say I take Roboplant Revolt with
>a gang of deckers. My opponent Mentors me and grabs the rep but I think
>that despite the fact that Mentor says the "opponent recieves nothing,"
>I will still get the nuyen bonus from the objective, just no rep. It
>seems to me that that wording on the card is supposed to be more of
>'Nya, Nya' than a literal usage. At least in my mind, the reciept of
>the bonus and the reciept of the rep are two seperate things.
>Similarly, if I take The Initiation with a bunch of runners and my
>opponent take the rep, I think that the runners who took it will still
>become gangers. Any opinions?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Travis
>
Good questions! I've never seen any official word on these, and given the
state of the game I doubt we ever will, so let me offer my opinions and
maybe as a group we can come to a concensus:

1. Since the runner with the passkey was part of the original group, I
think he/she would be included in the second attempt.

2. If your opponent plays the FM before you've chosen rep or nuyen from
The Vault, I'd say you still have the option to choose nuyen and he/she
gets nothing. In this case I'd say you get nothing either. In your other
examples, I'd say your opponent gets the rep and nobody gets the bonus.
Think of it this way: If someone takes credit for work you've done, you
get no benefit from it, at least monetary bonuses. I can see an argument
that your runners might still get experience even though the tangible
effects of the run were stolen from you.

Other opinions?

David
Message no. 3
From: Matt Breton mrbreton@*******.com
Subject: A Few Questions
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 11:26:18 PDT
>Good questions! I've never seen any official word on these, and >given the
>state of the game I doubt we ever will, so let me offer my >opinions and
>maybe as a group we can come to a concensus:

>1. Since the runner with the passkey was part of the original group, >I
>think he/she would be included in the second attempt.

I usually allow the Runner team to be re-designated, so long as the Runner
who used the Bulldog is involved. For one thing, different Objectives may
require different types of Runners, which makes the card more flexible. For
another, most Runners at the end of a run are beat up and shot all the hell
-- the only folks who'd regularly be able to use the card are Big Bully
Trolls.

A potential rewording for the card would be to allow the user's owner to
declare a second shadowrun in the same turn; since nominating the team comes
after declaring the shadowrun, that should be kosher. From a game-design
viewpoint, I probably would've made the card a Special or a Stinger -- but
that's just me.

>2. If your opponent plays the FM before you've chosen rep or nuyen >from
>The Vault, I'd say you still have the option to choose nuyen and >he/she
>gets nothing. In this case I'd say you get nothing either.

Opinion 'round heah is that False Mentor only grabs Rep -- if your opponent
played it before you decided on the Vault's reward, he'd be SOL and you'd be
counting coins. With some Objectives, this seems pretty obvious -- Data
Download, or whatever the one that rewards Deckers it's called -- they're
there on the spot to transfer the cash.

One way to look at it is whether the Bonus is considered part of the
Reputation Award; I don't think the RBT makes a statement about it. If the
Bonus is separate, though, then it raises a question of whether Bonus Rep
would also be stolen by the Mentor -- I see that as a pretty clever way of
limiting FM's (ab)usage, myself.



- Matt





_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Message no. 4
From: Travis Phillips tmphill@******.com
Subject: A Few Questions
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 17:08:34 -0600
I've had a few questions come up lately that I could use some opinions
on:

1. I send a team on a run and hit an Elite Security Mage. My opponent
frags a card to send my runner holding the Maglocks Passkey home. I
defeat that challenge and run into Maglocks. I guess wrong and go
home. Since someone on the team was holding the Bulldog Van, I want to
send my team again against the Maglocks. Do y'all think that I can send
the holder of the Passkey on this second run even though he was sent
home prior to the rest of the team?


2. I grab The Vault and before I have made a decision of rep or nuyen,
my opponent plays False Mentor. I think that I can choose to take nuyen
and he can't do anything, and if I choose to take the rep, he can only
take the rep and not convert it to nuyen. He hadn't read the card
(Mentor) and had been under the impression that he could take the
objective and then convert it to nuyen. I actually let him do this
because I was winning by a large margin, but I'm sure I'm right on
this. One question I do have is this: Say I take Roboplant Revolt with
a gang of deckers. My opponent Mentors me and grabs the rep but I think
that despite the fact that Mentor says the "opponent recieves nothing,"
I will still get the nuyen bonus from the objective, just no rep. It
seems to me that that wording on the card is supposed to be more of
'Nya, Nya' than a literal usage. At least in my mind, the reciept of
the bonus and the reciept of the rep are two seperate things.
Similarly, if I take The Initiation with a bunch of runners and my
opponent take the rep, I think that the runners who took it will still
become gangers. Any opinions?

Thanks,

Travis
Message no. 5
From: David Reis david.reis@*****.com
Subject: A Few Questions
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 22:45:52 -0700
At 05:08 PM 5/14/99 -0600, Travis Phillips <tmphill@******.com> wrote:
>I've had a few questions come up lately that I could use some opinions
>on:
>
>1. I send a team on a run and hit an Elite Security Mage. My opponent
>frags a card to send my runner holding the Maglocks Passkey home. I
>defeat that challenge and run into Maglocks. I guess wrong and go
>home. Since someone on the team was holding the Bulldog Van, I want to
>send my team again against the Maglocks. Do y'all think that I can send
>the holder of the Passkey on this second run even though he was sent
>home prior to the rest of the team?
>
>
>2. I grab The Vault and before I have made a decision of rep or nuyen,
>my opponent plays False Mentor. I think that I can choose to take nuyen
>and he can't do anything, and if I choose to take the rep, he can only
>take the rep and not convert it to nuyen. He hadn't read the card
>(Mentor) and had been under the impression that he could take the
>objective and then convert it to nuyen. I actually let him do this
>because I was winning by a large margin, but I'm sure I'm right on
>this. One question I do have is this: Say I take Roboplant Revolt with
>a gang of deckers. My opponent Mentors me and grabs the rep but I think
>that despite the fact that Mentor says the "opponent recieves nothing,"
>I will still get the nuyen bonus from the objective, just no rep. It
>seems to me that that wording on the card is supposed to be more of
>'Nya, Nya' than a literal usage. At least in my mind, the reciept of
>the bonus and the reciept of the rep are two seperate things.
>Similarly, if I take The Initiation with a bunch of runners and my
>opponent take the rep, I think that the runners who took it will still
>become gangers. Any opinions?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Travis
>
Good questions! I've never seen any official word on these, and given the
state of the game I doubt we ever will, so let me offer my opinions and
maybe as a group we can come to a concensus:

1. Since the runner with the passkey was part of the original group, I
think he/she would be included in the second attempt.

2. If your opponent plays the FM before you've chosen rep or nuyen from
The Vault, I'd say you still have the option to choose nuyen and he/she
gets nothing. In this case I'd say you get nothing either. In your other
examples, I'd say your opponent gets the rep and nobody gets the bonus.
Think of it this way: If someone takes credit for work you've done, you
get no benefit from it, at least monetary bonuses. I can see an argument
that your runners might still get experience even though the tangible
effects of the run were stolen from you.

Other opinions?

David
Message no. 6
From: Matt Breton mrbreton@*******.com
Subject: A Few Questions
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 11:26:18 PDT
>Good questions! I've never seen any official word on these, and >given the
>state of the game I doubt we ever will, so let me offer my >opinions and
>maybe as a group we can come to a concensus:

>1. Since the runner with the passkey was part of the original group, >I
>think he/she would be included in the second attempt.

I usually allow the Runner team to be re-designated, so long as the Runner
who used the Bulldog is involved. For one thing, different Objectives may
require different types of Runners, which makes the card more flexible. For
another, most Runners at the end of a run are beat up and shot all the hell
-- the only folks who'd regularly be able to use the card are Big Bully
Trolls.

A potential rewording for the card would be to allow the user's owner to
declare a second shadowrun in the same turn; since nominating the team comes
after declaring the shadowrun, that should be kosher. From a game-design
viewpoint, I probably would've made the card a Special or a Stinger -- but
that's just me.

>2. If your opponent plays the FM before you've chosen rep or nuyen >from
>The Vault, I'd say you still have the option to choose nuyen and >he/she
>gets nothing. In this case I'd say you get nothing either.

Opinion 'round heah is that False Mentor only grabs Rep -- if your opponent
played it before you decided on the Vault's reward, he'd be SOL and you'd be
counting coins. With some Objectives, this seems pretty obvious -- Data
Download, or whatever the one that rewards Deckers it's called -- they're
there on the spot to transfer the cash.

One way to look at it is whether the Bonus is considered part of the
Reputation Award; I don't think the RBT makes a statement about it. If the
Bonus is separate, though, then it raises a question of whether Bonus Rep
would also be stolen by the Mentor -- I see that as a pretty clever way of
limiting FM's (ab)usage, myself.



- Matt





_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Message no. 7
From: Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz <treehugr@****.ON.ROGERS.WAVE.CA>
Subject: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 12:01:14 -0500
Hi Fasa Crew!
I have a few questions regarding how many runners can be used or even
triggered to go on a run.

1) If I have 6 runners active on a run:
a) Can I use Snipers roost to assist the team from the safehouse?

b) Can I use multiple Runners with FN Har <indirect fire>?


2) If I declare 6 runners to form a Shadowruning team and:
a) 1 runner turns back from a Bad Lunch/Private Security Mage/Green
Apple Quick Steps/dies/etc, can I then 'turn' Red Widow/Runner with a
Yamaha Rapier to send her on the run?

b) 1 runner gets turns back for the same above reasons, can someone
else then send in a similar runner?


3) FastJack the Decker questions:
a) Can he use his ability on a 'closed system'?

b) Can he turn to assist another runner team other than his his
own?<ie: an ally team mate>

c) Must he be present on the run and therefore count towards the 6
runner total to use his ability?


4) When do you LotI someone else's LotI? Is it declared before the first
LotI is rolled or played after the first LotI is rolled?

Thanks for your time! I hope to hear from you soon.

Tamara
http://ammo.mgl.ca/lady
treehugr@******.wave.ca
Message no. 8
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 01:12:48 -0700
Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz wrote:

> Hi Fasa Crew!

Quick note: No one here (with maybe the exception of Joel Biske) is
officially FASA. We can always provide answers, but take everything
with a grain of salt.

> I have a few questions regarding how many runners can be used or even
> triggered to go on a run.

> 1) If I have 6 runners active on a run:
> a) Can I use Snipers roost to assist the team from the safehouse?

No. A Runner "assisting" in a run counts toward the number of Runners
on a team. (Deckers are considered "assistance.") There needs to be a
Runner *present* on the shadowrun to score an Objecive.

> b) Can I use multiple Runners with FN Har <indirect fire>?

Ditto. Note: Say you have four runners with Ranger Arms SM-3 (+6/0,
Indirect Fire), Lord Torgo (9/9) in a Sniper's Roost, and Static (0/1).
Sure, you can send Static on a run by himself, and with the assists, the
total Attack Value of the team is *eep* 33 points of damage. However,
when Static takes one point of damage, he will die (even DocWagon can't
save him!) and the run is over.

So while a Runner or two with indirect fire is fine, you can't really
rely *solely* on Indirect Fire. (After all: using the Gear assumes
you're going into battle. Less Runners on the team means less Runners
to sleaze, and to soak damage, which means a shorter run. Actually,
I've been contemplating a deck like this - solo Runner, perhaps a
Skillsoft guy like Uncle Joe - a Sleep to boost him - and a lot of guys
with Ranger-X's.)

> 2) If I declare 6 runners to form a Shadowruning team and:
> a) 1 runner turns back from a Bad Lunch/Private Security Mage/Green
> Apple Quick Steps/dies/etc, can I then 'turn' Red Widow/Runner with a
> Yamaha Rapier to send her on the run?

FASA's inconclusive on this one. My say is that both Widow and the
Rapier could be used. In fact, you should be able to use the Rapier to
send one of your Runner's one someone *else's* run, although there's no
good reason why.

> b) 1 runner gets turns back for the same above reasons, can someone
> else then send in a similar runner?

Red Widow can only go on "owner's shadowrun in progress." Read above
for my opinion on the Rapier.

> 3) FastJack the Decker questions:
> a) Can he use his ability on a 'closed system'?

FASA has ruled that Recons are Matrix actions and, FastJack being a
decker, I would assume his ability is Matrix-related as well. A closed
system cannot be affected by Matrix actions, so I would imagine it's
immune.

Currently there's only one Closed System (Impossible Mission) in the
game. The Custom System Challenge provides a similar effect.

> b) Can he turn to assist another runner team other than his his
> own?<ie: an ally team mate>

Yes. It affects a "Runner team", not "owner".

> c) Must he be present on the run and therefore count towards the 6
> runner total to use his ability?

Strictly speaking, no, since it's a Runner ability. Personally, I'd
prefer for it to be limited in this manner - it's a hefty ability. (A
combined Recon *and* it annihilates Motion Detectors! Too cool!)

> 4) When do you LotI someone else's LotI? Is it declared before the first
> LotI is rolled or played after the first LotI is rolled?

After the first LotI is rolled. There are no "interrupts" in SR.

> Thanks for your time! I hope to hear from you soon.

> Tamara
> http://ammo.mgl.ca/lady
> treehugr@******.wave.ca

Treehugger! Ahhh! DEI! :)
Message no. 9
From: Rob Harris <rjharris@********.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 13:21:19 -0600
We actually HAVE gotten a ruling from FASA on this one. The awnser is that
the runner sent home counts as one of the six runners for the run. So if
you had six runners, and one is sent home, you could re-add that runner (if
you could find a way), but no OTHER runners other than the original six may
be added. I thought that it was kind of a cheap ruling, but they had stuck
by it through other questions. Thanks again, everyone....

Rob

P.S. I asked it tapped runners could be added by discarding the Yahama
Rapier. I was told no.

----------
2) If I declare 6 runners to form a Shadowruning team and:
a) 1 runner turns back from a Bad Lunch/Private Security Mage/Green
Apple Quick Steps/dies/etc, can I then 'turn' Red Widow/Runner with a
Yamaha Rapier to send her on the run?
>
> FASA's inconclusive on this one. My say is that both Widow and the
> Rapier could be used. In fact, you should be able to use the Rapier to
> send one of your Runner's one someone *else's* run, although there's no
> good reason why.
Message no. 10
From: Bull <chaos@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 16:28:22 -0500
At 01:12 AM 10/24/97 -0700, Matb wrote these timeless words:
>Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz wrote:
>
>> Hi Fasa Crew!
>
>Quick note: No one here (with maybe the exception of Joel Biske) is
>officially FASA. We can always provide answers, but take everything
>with a grain of salt.
>
If you take a look at the original message, Tamara sent the original to
FASA as well as to us...:]

Bull
--
Bull, aka Steven Ratkovich, aka Rak, aka a lot of others! :]

The Offical Celebrity Shadowrn Mailing List Welcome Ork Decker!
Fearless Leader of the Star Wars Mailing List
List Flunky of ShadowCreations, creators of the Newbies Guide,
in production now!
HOME PAGE: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3604/home.html

"Whoever invented solataire is one sadistic son of a bitch"
-- Me, after spending 2 hours trying to win a game
Message no. 11
From: "J.P Haworth" <jhaworth@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 17:46:46 -0500
> > 3) FastJack the Decker questions:
> > a) Can he use his ability on a 'closed system'?
>
> FASA has ruled that Recons are Matrix actions and, FastJack being a
> decker, I would assume his ability is Matrix-related as well. A
> closed
> system cannot be affected by Matrix actions, so I would imagine it's
> immune.
>

I asked Fasa about this question and Jim Nelson replyed with the
following:
<< I have a question concerning Fastjack and Impossible Mission: Can
Fastjack use his ability to "look at all challenges on an objective and
choose the order in which to encounter them". It does not say that
Fastjack's ability is a matrix action but it could be considered the
same as a decker who uses recon.
You can still use Fastjack's special ability on Impossible
Mission.

I am assuming that I already know the answer to the next question, I

am only asking to confirm. Can a decker with recon use his ability on
one of his own challenges, example use recon to reveal your own custom
system to prevent another player from using recon on that objective.>>
Yes. Cool idea!

Later, Redman...
Jim N.

Redman
Message no. 12
From: Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz <treehugr@****.ON.ROGERS.WAVE.CA>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 17:58:38 -0500
Bull wrote:
> >> Hi Fasa Crew!
> >Quick note: No one here (with maybe the exception of Joel Biske) is
> >officially FASA. We can always provide answers, but take everything
> >with a grain of salt.
> >
> If you take a look at the original message, Tamara sent the original to
> FASA as well as to us...:]

Yes, I did,... I thought you all would like to mull over the questions
and then the rulings as well. *blush*

Tamara
Message no. 13
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 06:58:49 -0700
J.P Haworth wrote:

> > > 3) FastJack the Decker questions:
> > > a) Can he use his ability on a 'closed system'?

> > FASA has ruled that Recons are Matrix actions and, FastJack being a
> > decker, I would assume his ability is Matrix-related as well. A
> > closed system cannot be affected by Matrix actions, so I would imagine it's
> > immune.

[Actually, I find the comment that Recons by Deckers are Matrix actions
to be rather absurd to begin with, but c'est la vie.]

> I asked Fasa about this question and Jim Nelson replyed with the
> following:

> << I have a question concerning Fastjack and Impossible Mission: Can
> Fastjack use his ability to "look at all challenges on an objective and
> choose the order in which to encounter them". It does not say that
> Fastjack's ability is a matrix action but it could be considered the
> same as a decker who uses recon.

> You can still use Fastjack's special ability on Impossible
> Mission.

This makes FastJack out-and-out the nastiest card, even surpassing
Torgo. (He doesn't even turn to do it!) And I just can't buy it.
Decker actions should either be all Matrix or all non-Matrix, no this
if-and-or-but silliness. OK, Fast Jack should be the coolest Decker,
and he *is*.. he just doesn't need to be *that* cool.

I'll get over this one day. :)

> I am assuming that I already know the answer to the next question, I
> am only asking to confirm. Can a decker with recon use his ability on
> one of his own challenges, example use recon to reveal your own custom
> system to prevent another player from using recon on that objective.>>

> Yes. Cool idea!

H'm. Initially it was my belief that Reconning does not reveal
Challenges; it simply allows the viewer to look at them. However, the
Security Decker specifically implies that Reconning does reveal them.

I remember someone commenting that Browse seemed to be overwhelmingly
powerful for its cost, and perhaps this is the balance - a card that has
been Reconned by another player *has* been revealed, just not to you.

This does make Integrated Control Centers a bit more useful, too.

-Mb
Message no. 14
From: robert john harris <rjharris@********.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 17:22:48 -0600
Agian, 'Friad not. On the FASA FAQ it states that reconing DOES NOT reveal
a challenge EXCEPT the Custom System. Custom System is an exception to the
rules in this regard. Hate to keep beating people with the FAQ, but I have
been working with FASA to get out a new and more complete one that would
awnser a lot of these questions. Thanks for your time, all.....

Rob
Message no. 15
From: Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz <treehugr@****.ON.ROGERS.WAVE.CA>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 18:29:17 -0500
robert john harris wrote:
Hate to keep beating people with the FAQ, but I have
> been working with FASA to get out a new and more complete one that would
> awnser a lot of these questions. Thanks for your time, all.....
>
> Rob

No No no.. please do. I think that I can speak for everyone here, we
would rather have Rock Solid Rulings then multiple house rules. Once
upon a time someone was compiling regularly a "Fasa Reply Faq" but it
has not been updated in a month or so. We would all appreciate anything
you care to do to resolve rule issues if it is coming from FASA.

my 2 cents...

Tamara
Message no. 16
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 08:01:55 -0700
robert john harris wrote:

[This was in regards to whether Recon revealed Custom System and, if it
did, whether it revealed other cards like Integrated Control Center and
so on.]

> Agian, 'Friad not. On the FASA FAQ it states that reconing DOES NOT reveal
> a challenge EXCEPT the Custom System. Custom System is an exception to the
> rules in this regard. Hate to keep beating people with the FAQ, but I have
> been working with FASA to get out a new and more complete one that would
> awnser a lot of these questions. Thanks for your time, all.....

This reminds to to print out a new copy of the FAQ. (Mine's buried,
somewhere.)

However. This is the sort of arbitrary ruling that the game is going to
die from. Either Reconning reveals, or Reconning doesn't reveal. I
could see the Security Decker being a special case (because it's
mentioned on the card that it's revealed by a Recon, and nuking Deckers
is the sole purpose of that card). However, Custom System has nowhere
near the same wording on the card,
and, frankly, I think it works wonderfully as a sort of "stinger" --
'You *thought* you could waltz through my Robo-Plant with ease, since
Static's on Matrix overwatch, but - aha!'

Yeah, it's an awkward card to use. You could always run against it and
pull out, although that means taking chances. I don't see the reason to
make it an exception to the rule, and I'd prefer that FASA keeps the
number of cards that are re-worded in the second printing to a minimum.
(I know of three dozen that could use clarification, that's plenty.)

Sorry if this sounds grumpy. I like clean rules, not a lot of special
cases, exemptions and exceptions. This ain't it.
Message no. 17
From: "J.P Haworth" <jhaworth@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 19:37:03 -0500
> However. This is the sort of arbitrary ruling that the game is going
> to
> die from. Either Reconning reveals, or Reconning doesn't reveal. I
> could see the Security Decker being a special case (because it's
> mentioned on the card that it's revealed by a Recon, and nuking
> Deckers
> is the sole purpose of that card). However, Custom System has nowhere
>
> near the same wording on the card,
> and, frankly, I think it works wonderfully as a sort of "stinger" --
> 'You *thought* you could waltz through my Robo-Plant with ease, since
> Static's on Matrix overwatch, but - aha!'
>
> Yeah, it's an awkward card to use. You could always run against it
> and
> pull out, although that means taking chances. I don't see the reason
> to
> make it an exception to the rule, and I'd prefer that FASA keeps the
> number of cards that are re-worded in the second printing to a
> minimum.
> (I know of three dozen that could use clarification, that's plenty.)

I think that this was the original intention for the card (to be
revealed by recon), why else would it be unique thus resticted to 1 per
deck. I don't feel that it is an exception to the rule, It was probaly
not worded properly during the first printing.
My 2 cents worth
Redman
Message no. 18
From: "(No Name Available)" <mothman@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 19:19:48 -0600
Redman wrote:

>>>I think that this was the original intention for the card (to be
revealed by recon), why else would it be unique thus resticted to 1 per
deck. I don't feel that it is an exception to the rule, It was probaly
not worded properly during the first printing.<<<

I agree. I think they probably just left the pertinent line off the card
by accident.
--
mothman@**********.com

"It's more fun to compute"
—Kraftwerk
Message no. 19
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: A few questions! :)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 09:28:56 -0700
> I think that this was the original intention for the card (to be
> revealed by recon), why else would it be unique thus resticted to 1 per
> deck. I don't feel that it is an exception to the rule, It was probaly
> not worded properly during the first printing.

Quite an important line to accidentally leave off. If they *really*
wanted to make it obvious, they could have made it a Special, so it
never has to be revealed (with the unintended weakness that it could be
LotI'd. Of course, Ghost and Dodger resist Specials; why not a Special
that does the same?)

Argument aside, it seems fairly obvious to me that it's quite functional
as the card stands now, and that the less items in FASA's FAQ, the
better. The more items that can stand under a singular rule, rather
than making individual exceptions, the better.

Take it as sour grapes on my part, if that's your way of looking at
things.


-Mb

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about A few questions! :), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!