Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Abadia, Teos" <Teos.Abadia@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Fuchi
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 15:41:53 -0500
> ----------
> From: Matb[SMTP:mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM]
>
> > > 1.2.1)Is it possible to be turned AND in the Safehouse?
>
> Ref. Green Apple Quicksteps: "Target Runner must immediately return
> to
> the safehouse."
> Given that the Runner must have turned to leave, the usage of the card
> will result in
> the Runner being a) turned and b) in the safehouse.
>
> The definition in the RBT (p. 14, iirc) specifically includes unturned
> Runners, but
> does not exclude turned Runners.
>
I don't know that I buy the connection. If turned runners are in the
safehouse... okay, here is a related hypothetical. If I send a runner
with Cortex Bomb on a Wanted, would the runner (if killed) inflict 5
damage (from the bomb) on everyone in the Safehouse? My current
rationale is "no, because the turned runner is not in the safehouse". I
guess you might argue that there is both a "turned in the safehouse" and
a "turned outside the safehouse". My feeling is that turned means
outside the safehouse until the refresh stage, when the runner returns.
Wish FASA wasn't so busy so they could answer all our questions about
being "present".

> > > 2)Let me make sure I heard this right...Can you have all/some of
> your
> > > deckers visit Fuchi and still have your Street Samaurai's go on a
> > > Shadowrun?
>
> Given the precedent set by the Z-zone, not to mention the difference
> in
> timing (viz,
> you visit Locations in your Legwork and go on a shadowrun on the
> Shadowrun phase),
> as well as game-balance issues, it is my lasting opinion that you
> cannot
> both visit
> the Location and go on a shadowrun.
>
> At the very least, the wording would be redundant: Any turned Runner
> (who has visited
> a Location, turned to Recon, turned by McDeven, or what-have-you)
> cannot
> participate
> in a shadowrun.
>
(answering both this and your next post)
I don't believe that Z-Zone sets a precedent. Z-Zone is a pretty
unusual card, and it is very specific. I still argue that Fuchi can be
interpreted either way. I do agree that a decker could not both go on a
Fuchi run and on a Shadowrun, but I feel that FASA will have to clear up
whether non-deckers could go on a run that same turn.

The more I think about it (I was the one with the original question, and
I haven't played with that deck since), if Fuchi could be visited and a
separate run could be made, you could create really unbalancing decks
specifically around that card. In essence, that single location and 3-4
deckers would be superior (due to recon and programs) to a deck with a
lot of Fame runners. In addition, the rest of the cards could be either
very defensive, or very offensive. Thus, I have decided in my game not
to allow a Shadowrun on the same round that Fuchi is visited.

One other question:
Who can visit Shadowland? Is it just hermetic deckers? Or everyone and
hermetic deckers? I think it is the second, but wording is again such
that either case could be interpreted.

Along the same lines, I imagine that the wording on Yellowjacket should
mean that a rigger can use Yellowjacket, or a runner with piloting 2 can
use Yellowjacket. Otherwise, the card could just say "play on runner
with piloting 2". Is this right?
Message no. 2
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Fuchi
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 16:57:42 -0800
Abadia, Teos wrote:
>
> > ----------
> > From: Matb[SMTP:mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM]
> >
> > > > 1.2.1)Is it possible to be turned AND in the Safehouse?
> >
> > Ref. Green Apple Quicksteps: "Target Runner must immediately return
> > to the safehouse." Given that the Runner must have turned to leave, the
usage of the card
> > will result in the Runner being a) turned and b) in the safehouse.

> > The definition in the RBT (p. 14, iirc) specifically includes unturned
> > Runners, but does not exclude turned Runners.

> I don't know that I buy the connection. If turned runners are in the
> safehouse... okay, here is a related hypothetical. If I send a runner
> with Cortex Bomb on a Wanted, would the runner (if killed) inflict 5

Send him on a Wanted? You mean, with a Wanted played on him, I
suppose..

> damage (from the bomb) on everyone in the Safehouse? My current
> rationale is "no, because the turned runner is not in the safehouse".

Game-balance-wise: Does it upset the game to have the Bomb deal damage
to *all* Runners on that side, or just all unturned Runners?

Related Q: Does it upset the game to prevent Mages and Deckers from
being Guarded? This, really, is the net effect of the house rule that
turned Runners are not in the safehouse, and seriously, seriously
undermines the effectiveness of a decker- or mage-based deck.

> I guess you might argue that there is both a "turned in the safehouse" and
> a "turned outside the safehouse".

No, I wouldn't. I would argue, however, that there is both a "turned in
the safehouse" and "unturned in the safehouse", with no difference
between the two as far as being present is concerned.

> My feeling is that turned means
> outside the safehouse until the refresh stage, when the runner returns.

I can buy this happening for Locations (which, incidentally, generate an
even weaker effect than most abilities, in most cases). And that is,
loosely, canon, as Mike Nielsen gave forth the idea that you can GAQ
someone to prevent them from visiting a Location.

However, I cannot see this applying - by game balance or by game
mechanics - to Runners who turn for other reasons.

> Wish FASA wasn't so busy so they could answer all our questions about
> being "present".

Seconded!

> > > > 2)Let me make sure I heard this right...Can you have all/some of
> > your deckers visit Fuchi and still have your Street Samaurai's go on a
> > shadowrun?

> > Given the precedent set by the Z-zone, not to mention the difference
> > in timing (viz, you visit Locations in your Legwork and go on a shadowrun on the
> > Shadowrun phase), as well as game-balance issues, it is my lasting opinion that
you
> > cannot both visit the Location and go on a shadowrun.

> > At the very least, the wording would be redundant: Any turned Runner
> > (who has visited a Location, turned to Recon, turned by McDeven, or
what-have-you)
> > cannot participate in a shadowrun.

> (answering both this and your next post)
> I don't believe that Z-Zone sets a precedent. Z-Zone is a pretty
> unusual card, and it is very specific.

Actually, the wording is very similar to Fuchi: Instead of (or, in place
of) a shadowrun, visit Foo Location.
And it's not like game mechanics can't be repeated between cards: look
at Ravage and Wired Reflexes, for instance.

There is, after all, only so many lines of text you can fit on a card.
By saying, "One or more Deckers.. may visit Fuchi instead of going on a
shadowrun", two effects are generated: You visit Fuchi instead of going
on a shadowrun, and you can only send Deckers to Fuchi. It's hard to
balance consistency and tersity, game intent and game effect.

> I still argue that Fuchi can be interpreted either way.

Similarly, so can the rules for "present". So can a lot of rules.

> One other question: Who can visit Shadowland? Is it just hermetic deckers? Or
everyone and
> hermetic deckers? I think it is the second, but wording is again such
> that either case could be interpreted.

This was, I believe, made clear in the FAQ: All Runners may visit
Shadowland, including Hermit Deckers (which may not normally visit
Locations). Why hermit Deckers can, and hermit Samurai can't (as an
example; there aren't any other hermit classes in the game) is beyond
me.

> Along the same lines, I imagine that the wording on Yellowjacket should
> mean that a rigger can use Yellowjacket, or a runner with piloting 2 can
> use Yellowjacket. Otherwise, the card could just say "play on runner
> with piloting 2". Is this right?

A Rigger with Piloting-anything (and even one who's been Whoopsed) may
have a Yellowjacket deployed on him or her. A non-Rigger Runner with
Piloting-2 (ie, using a Skillsoft) may also have the Yellowjacket
deployed.


-Mb
Message no. 3
From: "J.P Haworth" <jhaworth@*******.COM>
Subject: Fuchi
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 02:06:07 -0800
I just received an e-mail back from Fasa on the correct ruling for Fuchi
Industries, below is my questions and Fasa's response. It seems I have
been playing Fuchi wrong all the time, I had just assumed that you could
send a group of Deckers to Fuchi and send other runners on a shadowrun.
Well I guess I'm only human, or am I?
I changed the original ruling which for the second question the
original reply was yes but just as I was about to send this I received
another e-mail.

In a message dated 12/8/97 7:48:46 PM, you wrote:

<<1. Can say 4 Statics go to Fuchi and then Hatchetman, Scorpio and
Skidz
go on a shadowrun on the same turn. The card says that "one or more
deckers may visit Fuchi instead of going on a shadowrun"

The phrasing on the card is bad (big surprise. I wish we had been able
to
spend more time considering the wording on the cards. we blew it more
often
than I care to admit <sigh>). A visit to Fuchi takes the place of a
shadowrun.
The card makes it sound as though Deckers are the only ones who can miss
the
shadowrun, but the intent is that a visit to Fuchi is done instead of a
shadowrun.

2. Can you send more than one group of deckers to Fuchi in the same
turn, example send 4 Statics, them 4 Ice Queens in another group, 4 The
Moles in a final group. I think this should be possible because more
than 1 runner can visit other locations like The Iron Lung, Hermetic
Library etc>>
Oops! I mean NO! Because Fuchi takes the place of a shadowrun,
you can only go
once per turn. Sorry about that yes (it's late).

Thanx
Redman
Message no. 4
From: Jyster !!! <jyster007@*******.COM>
Subject: Fuchi
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 01:07:07 PST
Hey heres a question.

Can you visit Fuchi if Block Party is in effect?

Block Party says no Shadowruns can be made while the

party is going.

Fuchi says visit instead of doing a Shadowrun.

So whats the verdict?

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 5
From: Crane <jack9@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: Fuchi
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 01:46:11 -0800
At 01:07 AM 12/16/97 PST, you wrote:
>Hey heres a question.
>
>Can you visit Fuchi if Block Party is in effect?
>
>Block Party says no Shadowruns can be made while the
>
>party is going.
>
>Fuchi says visit instead of doing a Shadowrun.
>
>So whats the verdict?
>
>______________________________________________________

I think that is one of the uses of block party...Z zone and Fuchi should be
useable, this is only my opinion.
Message no. 6
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Fuchi
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 00:10:37 -0800
Jyster !!! wrote:

> Hey heres a question.

> Can you visit Fuchi if Block Party is in effect?
> Block Party says no Shadowruns can be made while the
> party is going.
> Fuchi says visit instead of doing a Shadowrun.
> So whats the verdict?

My opinion has always been that you can. Visting Fuchi and the Z-zone
remain *visiting*, not *shadowrunning*. Along the same lines..

- You can't Wild Goose Chase a group going to Fuchi;
- You can't use a Bulldog Van to go a second time;
- If, for whatever reason, they have a decker-mage among them, you
couldn't have a Bullet Barrier active;
et cetera, et cetera.


-Mb

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Fuchi, 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.