Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Conrad Mikaelian <MLoki@***.COM>
Subject: Re: FASA answer on Flatline and Ammo (was Re: Flatline and
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 03:37:28 -0400
In a message dated 97-09-18 21:00:21 EDT, you write:

<< Q. Normally, according to card text, only one type of ammo may be used
per combat. Of course, the extended clip may be used to allow two
types of ammo in combat. How about Flatline, since he uses two
different pistols can't each pistol use a different ammo?

A. Yes. That's cool...
~~~~~~~~~~ >>

Doesn't the rules on the card mean anything in this situation. "Only one
type of Ammo can be used in each combat." is pretty self explanitory. Is
their a misprint, or are they just making a ruling to the contrary. Do they
just want ammo cards to be cooler? I thought that the armor piercing
flechette round combo was cool enough when it could only be used with
extended clip. Let me know what I'm missing here.
Message no. 2
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: FASA answer on Flatline and Ammo (was Re: Flatline and
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 20:00:58 -0700
Re: Flatline, Guns, and Other Means of Mass Destruction

> Doesn't the rules on the card mean anything in this situation. "Only one
> type of Ammo can be used in each combat." is pretty self explanitory. Is
> their a misprint, or are they just making a ruling to the contrary. Do they
> just want ammo cards to be cooler? I thought that the armor piercing
> flechette round combo was cool enough when it could only be used with
> extended clip. Let me know what I'm missing here.

How about couting each pistol damage separately? Flatty would do (?) 4
AP with the armor piercing, plus 4 or 8 (if target's unarmored).

How about letting Flatty do the old John Woo and nail two different
targets at the same time?

No?

Aww.... :)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about FASA answer on Flatline and Ammo (was Re: Flatline and, 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!