| From: | Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | FASA's response to Brett v2.0 |
| Date: | Tue, 16 Sep 1997 09:10:00 -0700 |
it, even though I already put out the first version. I'm not sure what
the clean-ups were, but let this supersede the first response to Breet
barksdale.
~~~~~~~~~~
---FASACorp2@***.com wrote:
>
> Loki,
>
> (I've cleaned up --ie: proofread--my response a bit. If you haven't
already
> posted it, please post this version). It's a little clearer.
>
> WOW! Brett's one angry guy (at least when it comes to GAQ). Here are
my
> thoughts (written to Brett but you may post them for all to see):
>
> <<<<To be blunt, I have to say that this is the WORST bunch of
rulings I've
> seen in any card game in a /long/ while.>>>>
>
><<<<Ye gods... GAQS now has been promoted to one of the most powerful
cards in
> the game BY FAR. And this isn't even considering the/defensive/ uses
of this
> card yet...>>>>
>
> Reply: GAQ IS one of the most useful cards in the game...and one of
the most
> potentially powerful. We intended that. Useful/powerful cards don't
always
> have to cost a fortune. If they did, where would the fun be? GAQ
provides an
> element of shock and surprise (it sounds like Brett has experienced
a little
> of both). Maybe we should start a GAQ support group...
>
> <<<<This game already has a serious endgame problem with each player
ending
> up with HORDES of runners. If you allow GAQS to be /this/ effective,
small
> running groups are toast. Just sit back and kill them off with GAQS
by
> sending the right runner home.>>>>
>
> Reply: I disagree that SRTCG has an endgame problem as described
above. If
> players are doing a good job of deckbuilding, most games shouldn't
end with
> hordes of Runners on each side--at least games shouldn't end that
way if you
> don't want them to.
> Anyway, why complain about having hordes of Runners at the end of
games in
> the same breath that you complain about GAQ being a useful card for
killing
> off Runners?
>
> <<<<Great, another advantage for GAQS. Get the most out of it. Set
the alarm
> off AND send the big gun home.
>
><<<<You know, kids. GAQS only costs TWO FRAGGIN NUYEN. Can you say
"game play
> imbalance". If you can't yet, play a few more games using this
ruling. You'll
> learn, trust me...>>>>
>
> Reply: We've used this card for months--and we think it works fine.
We can
> say "game imbalance". Can you say "overeaction"?
>
> <<<<There are a host of other stingers that cost more and don't
screw over an
> enemy running team even HALF as bad as GAQS can using this
> interpretation.>>>>
>
> Reply: No? What about No Way Out? or Bad Reputation? They're
CHEAPER than
> GAQ...and potentially nastier. I'd say All or Nothing, at a cost of
4Y, could
> mess up a team of Runners worse than GAQ...
>
> <<<<I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised, though. It took FASA
actual
> playtesting to realize that False Mentor, costing only 4 nuyen and
not being
> unique, would unbalance and dominate a game. Duh. :-)
>
><<<<I think it took us about 10 seconds to read it and realize its
> implications.>>>>
>
> Reply: Aw, now you're just being mean...
>
>
> <<<<Q. I have used GAQS to send a runner home that held the
<necessary
> skill(s) to sleaze a challenge thus triggering the alarm. <(i.e. an
opponent
> has Sam the Sleuth and Nightshade in on a run. <The challenge
revealed is
> Lone Star Patrol. Sam's Street 2 and <Stealth would sleaze it so I
toss out a
> GAQS and get rid of him.) I <was just wondering how the same applies
to sendin
> g home a <runner who has triggered it (the same might apply to using
GAQS <on
> a runner with stealth that triggered Eyekillers).
>
> >A. If you play GAQ when the Challenge is revealed and before the
>alarm is
> triggered, it's okay. People think WAY too hard about >timing on
this card.
> It takes effect when it's played--it's that >simple. The reason you
can't use
> it to "interrupt" a combat is that >once combat begins, it's
instantaneous.
> All damage is dealt >simultaneously so it can't be interrupted.
>
> What kind of stupid *$&^%_)#! ruling is this? Is Jim SERIOUSLY
claiming that
> there is no hard and fast ruling on timing for GAQS? How the
/hell/does one
> determine that infinitesimal time between when the challenge card is
flipped
> up and when it registers in the players brains that a challenge has
not been
> sleazed? Is the first person to yell out "no sleaze"? What if a
person
> incorrectly yells out "no sleaze" every time someone ELSE is on a
run just to
> make sure that they're first? Do we now have to have rules to punish
such
> actions? If no punishment, then there's no fraggin reason NOT to
yell out "no
> sleaze" each and every time.>>>>
>
> Reply: <Sigh>. I suppose it's too much to ask that some players go
without
> "hard and fast" rulings on everything. It's just a . It should be
fun...
> ...but, to address the points you make above: it's not necessary to
> "determine that infinitesimal time between when the challenge card
is flipped
> up and when it registers in the players brains that a Challenge has
not been
> sleazed". Because GAQ is a Stinger it can basically send a Runner
back at any
> time (other than during combat). Let me put it this way: by rule,
when a
> Challenge flips over the owner of the Challenge reads the sleaze
requirements
> aloud and the shadowrunning player looks to see if his Runners can
sleaze the
> Challenge. At this point, there is a natural pause during which
players can
> examine and assess the situation and play Stingers (shouting out "no
sleaze "
> is ridiculous and unsportsmanlike solution--completely in conflict
with the
> spirit of the game). If it helps you understand timing, then think
of this as
> a short "phase" when Stingers can be played. Because players can
assess the
> situation at this point, GAQ can be used to send a Runner back and
prevent
> the Challenge from being sleazed. Players also have time to see if
the alarm
> is going to be triggered and play GAQ to "set up" the remaining
Runners for a
> nasty combat. If the alarm IS triggered, there is another natural
pause
> before players start comparing Threat ratings or assigning damage.
This is
> the other "phase" during which it's okay to play a Stinger. Having
already
> had an opportunity to consider playing GAQ, it should be easy enough
for a
> player to "jump in" after the alarm is triggered and play GAQ before
combat
> begins. All of this is basically a complicated way to say that you
should
> allow other players a brief opportunity to play Stingers before
either
> sleazing or combat begin.
>
> <<<<This is just the tip of the iceberg if one subscribes to this
idiotic
> interpretation of timing in SRTCG.>>>>
>
> Reply: You're just overreacting again. There's no need for
name-calling.
>
> <<<<I don't mean to sound this nasty, but FASA needs to RETHINK THEIR
> POSITION on this in a big bad way. This ruling effectively ruins the
game -
> almost as bad as the cheap, non-unique GAQS.>>>>
>
> Reply: Okay, I HAVE to say it...are you crazy? You think this
ruling "ruins
> the game"? Boy, you must have been burned pretty badly by a GAQ. Do
you
> realize that there's a FREE card (Luck o' the Irish) with a 50%
chance of
> stopping a GAQ? Do you realize that the 50% chance can be modified
for FREE
> (with Loaded Dice). Do you realize that strategic use of your cards
(esp.
> Runners) can prevent you from being screwed by GAQ?
> I'm sorry if I'm being flippant but your comments were more than a
little
> rude. It seems to me that for a card to RUIN the game it would have
to be so
> broken that it virtually guaranteed victory and GAQ just doesn't
qualify.
> Sure, it can sting you...that's why it's a Stinger! But if you put
cards in
> your deck that can counter it and play smart, GAQ will rarely (if
ever)
> singlehandedly beat you.
>
> <<<<I understand the desire to have simpler timing rules than Magic,
but this
> is ridiculous.>>
>
> Reply: Oh, well. You can't please ALL of the people...
> ...I hope there are some people out there who like this ruling. I
think it
> makes the game more fun!
>
> Jim Nelson
~~~~~~~~~~
===
@>--,--'--- 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
