Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz <treehugr@****.ON.ROGERS.WAVE.CA>
Subject: ANother Question :-) [Silencers]
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:45:01 -0400
Thanks to those who contributed on my last set of questions. I never
realized that the Bounty Hunter could be used so often. My gaming group
was under the impression that it was only used if you declared that you
were voluntarily <sp> stopping your run. But if it can be used whenever
a runner fails to acheive an Objective, which happens all the time, then
I can see that being a popular card.

Regardless, on to my latest pondering. I have been toying with the idea
of a Sleaze-Silent deck... on to my question.

1) If I have a Team made up of Silent and non-silent weapons and I
encounter a challenge, if my silent weapons/runners do enuff DMG by
themselves without including the NON-silent weapons/runners, is that
Challenge considered sleazed?
Or must you create a team of ALL silent runners?

2) If the alarm is already triggered from say a "Hit And Run" and you
next encounter say an Elite Security Mage, if you defeat the E.S.M. with
all silent weapons is the alarm then considered to be reset for the
third challenge?

Thanks guys and gal!

Tamara
Message no. 2
From: Forrest <eness@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: ANother Question :-) [Silencers]
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 13:02:06 -0700
---Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz <treehugr@****.ON.ROGERS.WAVE.CA> wrote:
[snip]
> 1) If I have a Team made up of Silent and non-silent weapons
and I
> encounter a challenge, if my silent weapons/runners do enuff DMG by
> themselves without including the NON-silent weapons/runners, is that
> Challenge considered sleazed?
> Or must you create a team of ALL silent runners?
>

I can't find the reference off hand, but I'm pretty sure that if ONLY
silenced weapons are used then the alarm is not triggered. I've been
wrong in the past though c(-:


> 2) If the alarm is already triggered from say a "Hit And
Run" and you
> next encounter say an Elite Security Mage, if you defeat the E.S.M.
with
> all silent weapons is the alarm then considered to be reset for the
> third challenge?
>

Actually, wasn't there an errata that stated Hit and Run ended the run?

Anyway, from the online rule book
at:http://www.fasa.com/Shadowrun/SRTCG/SRTCGRules/SRTCGRulesPlaying.html

"Once a Runner team triggers the alarm, all Challenges are alerted to
the Runners' presence. The Runners cannot sleaze
Challenges for the remainder of the shadowrun and they must face the
Challenge on which they triggered the alarm. "

So if there is something that triggers an alarm, but doesn't end the
run (say Nets :-) ) the alarm is in effect (unless reset by something
like the Sleaze program) for the remainder of the run.

Forrest
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com
Message no. 3
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: ANother Question :-) [Silencers]
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 04:29:29 -0700
> Regardless, on to my latest pondering. I have been toying with the idea
> of a Sleaze-Silent deck... on to my question.

Hey! That's my deck!

> 1) If I have a Team made up of Silent and non-silent weapons and I
> encounter a challenge, if my silent weapons/runners do enuff DMG by
> themselves without including the NON-silent weapons/runners, is that
> Challenge considered sleazed?
> Or must you create a team of ALL silent runners?

If I were playing against you, I'd say that you can limit the "active"
bunch to just the Silencer guys - *but* those are going to be the guys
who take all the damage, too. Gotta be fair.

> 2) If the alarm is already triggered from say a "Hit And Run" and
you
> next encounter say an Elite Security Mage, if you defeat the E.S.M. with
> all silent weapons is the alarm then considered to be reset for the
> third challenge?

*Chuckle* No, sorry, although there is some 'ware that can reset the
alarm to silent.
Message no. 4
From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: ANother Question :-) [Silencers]
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 23:59:28 -0700
---Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz wrote:
>
> 1) If I have a Team made up of Silent and non-silent weapons
and I
> encounter a challenge, if my silent weapons/runners do enuff DMG by
> themselves without including the NON-silent weapons/runners, is that
> Challenge considered sleazed?

I would say yes, though I also agree with Matb that damage should then
be divided amongst the silent weapon holders since they were the only
ones involved in combat.

I'm going to go to FASA for the official word though.

===
@>--,--'--- Loki <gamemstr@********.com>

Fearless Leader of the Shadowrun Trading Card Game Mailing List
Web Page: Poisoned Elves at www.primenet.com/~gamemstr

"You're calling me Bitch like it's a bad thing."
--> CrapGame during the Drive in the Country tournament
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com
Message no. 5
From: Neil Fathulla <fathullan@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: ANother Question :-) [Silencers]
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 17:26:27 +1000
I don't think it is that simple Loki. I can see your point of view from =
the
rules ie only guard can take other runners damage. However the running t=
eams
owner can distribute damage from challenge cards. For eg if a runner tea=
m of 6
only needs to use two of those runners to combat a challenge, why can't the=

owner distribute any damage to other team member's. Think of it as stray=
fire
for eg.

Any other thoughts.


Regards
Neil



MIME:daddyjim @ ROCKETMAIL.COM
16/09/97 17:02
To: -:SRCARD @ LISTPROC.ITRIBE.NET@********
cc: (bcc: Neil Fathulla/CEGELEC)
Subject: Re: ANother Question :-) [Silencers]

---Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz wrote:
>
> 1) If I have a Team made up of Silent and non-silent weapons
and I
> encounter a challenge, if my silent weapons/runners do enuff DMG by
> themselves without including the NON-silent weapons/runners, is that
> Challenge considered sleazed?

I would say yes, though I also agree with Matb that damage should then
be divided amongst the silent weapon holders since they were the only
ones involved in combat.

I'm going to go to FASA for the official word though.

===
@>--,--'--- Loki <gamemstr@********.com>
Message no. 6
From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: ANother Question :-) [Silencers]
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 18:30:49 -0700
---Neil Fathulla wrote:
>
> I don't think it is that simple Loki. I can see your point of view
from the
> rules ie only guard can take other runners damage. However the
running teams
> owner can distribute damage from challenge cards. For eg if a
runner team of 6
> only needs to use two of those runners to combat a challenge, why
can't the
> owner distribute any damage to other team member's. Think of it as
stray fire
> for eg.
>
> Any other thoughts.

That was just a comment in MHO. I felt if you were going to cut down
to only your silenced runners to fight the challenge and reset the
alarm, you shouldn't be able to pull in your other runners to soak the
damage. Combat and damage are simultaneous.

I'm still waiting to receive the official FASA word on it though. Who
knows, they may say the whole team needs silenced weapons to pull it
off.

One, other thing. Can you please put your replies after the message
you are quoting (as I'm doing here). Thanx!

===
@>--,--'--- Loki <gamemstr@********.com>

Fearless Leader of the Shadowrun Trading Card Game Mailing List
Web Page: Poisoned Elves at www.primenet.com/~gamemstr

"You're calling me Bitch like it's a bad thing."
--> CrapGame during the Drive in the Country tournament
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about ANother Question :-) [Silencers], 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!