Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Crane <jack9@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: fuchi industries Uhoh!
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 19:42:03 -0800
At 02:25 PM 12/15/97 -0800, you wrote:
>A tale of 2 Joes wrote:
>
>> hey all,
>
>> i'm just full of annoying questions today. i missed the whole
>> fuchi industries debate, and in the off-chance that the gods of FASA
>> perform a miracle this christmas and i get one, i had some questions on
>> its wording/usage.
>
>Normally I'd pull my hair out and run screaming from the 'room; however,
>I woke up this morning and realized I'm getting a bit too old (and bald)
>for that. So, here goes:
>
>> "instead of going on a shadowrun" so i can visit it instead of going on
a
>> shadowrun, or the deckers just can't go?
>
>Visit instead of going on a shadowrun. (Unlike -nudge- a certain (poke)
>person *ahem* around here would like to say.)
>
>> i visit during my legwork phase as normal, right?
>
>I've always played that you do; its more along the lines that it
>prevents you from having a shadowrun phase that you visit it during the
>shadowrun phase.
>
>> can more than one group of deckers visit it in a turn? if indeed i'm=
going
>> during my legwork phase.
>
>Nope. You have to give up a shadowrun to visit, and you only have one
>shadowrun to give up. (Bulldog Van doesn't work, since the Runners
>aren't really shadowrunning, either).
>
>> "turn visiting deckers" so that's the total amount of decking as a team
>> and not a roll for each individual decker?
>
>Yup. Otherwise FJ's the only one who's going to haul your Rep in.
>(Well, maybe Static+Fairlight+Loaded Dice+Wabbit's Foot, but that's an
>awful lot for a piddly 5 Rep.)
>
>"Easy Errata version":
>
>Fuchi Industries / Location / 4¥
>Hermit Deckers may visit Fuchi Industries. Send a team of Runners to
>Fuchi and roll D6 (+1 for each level of Decking): [...] If you visit
>Fuchi, you may not make a shadowrun this turn. Use only once per turn.
>
>"Team" is defined as any group of up to six Runners sharing the same
>activity - most importantly, on a shadowrun, intercept, or visiting a
>Location together (Z-zone, Fuchi). All Runners are considered present
>with each other while part of the team.
>

I don't know about a maximum of 6 runners....
I'd like to hear other opinions,
I'm open on this issue.
Message no. 2
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: fuchi industries Uhoh!
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 23:53:11 -0800
> I don't know about a maximum of 6 runners....
> I'd like to hear other opinions,
> I'm open on this issue.

Well, *koff* six Runners should be more than plenty to max out the roll
on Fuchi (given a not-quite-true average of Decking-2). I suppose you
could send more just to have them turned (or not present in the
safehouse) or if you're playing with four Tinys (the "Go Ahead, Hit Me
Again" decker deck).

While I don't see an absolute need for stricture, I think the limit is
more or less built-in already -- that, and it does keep similar cards
working in a similar fashion.

But that's just MO.

-Mb
Message no. 3
From: Vesa-Matti Sarenius <sarenius@****.STUDENT.OULU.FI>
Subject: Re: fuchi industries Uhoh!
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 16:55:45 +0200
>Well, *koff* six Runners should be more than plenty to max out the roll

Did you BTW know that KOFF is Finnish beer... ...just to lighten the
discussion.


Vesa-Matti Sarenius * - Am I a man or what? - A What!*
mailto:sarenius@*******.oulu.fi * - What? - Yes, that's right! *
Koskitie 47 A6 FIN-90500 OULU * * * * *
http://www.student.oulu.fi/~sarenius * * * * * * * * * * hmmmm! *
Finland, Europe. Tel. +358-8-342236 fax.+358-8-5305045. * * * * * *
Message no. 4
From: "Abadia, Teos" <Teos.Abadia@****.COM>
Subject: Re: fuchi industries Uhoh!
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 11:29:47 -0500
> I don't know about a maximum of 6 runners....
> I'd like to hear other opinions,
> I'm open on this issue.
>
I think a max of six runners is a good limit on just about any
situation. Otherwise, it can be too unbalancing. I mean, even with
six, you probably will end up near the top of the possible outcomes,
since with 6 deckers some will have more than decking one, and probably
most will have decking 2. More than 6 seems overkill to me.

Teos.
Message no. 5
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: fuchi industries Uhoh!
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 10:04:13 -0800
Vesa-Matti Sarenius wrote:

> >Well, *koff* six Runners should be more than plenty to max out the roll

> Did you BTW know that KOFF is Finnish beer... ...just to lighten the
> discussion.

Believe it or not... yes. One of the bars in Boston has an "around
the world" months every year or so. *I'm* not a beer drinker (blech -
I'd rather lick the bottom of my boot) but my brother is.


-Mb
Message no. 6
From: Jim O'Keeffe <jokeeffe@********.COM>
Subject: Re: fuchi industries Uhoh!
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 17:14:48 -0500
Abadia, Teos wrote:

> > I don't know about a maximum of 6 runners....
> > I'd like to hear other opinions,
> > I'm open on this issue.
> >
> I think a max of six runners is a good limit on just about any
> situation. Otherwise, it can be too unbalancing. I mean, even with
> six, you probably will end up near the top of the possible outcomes,
> since with 6 deckers some will have more than decking one, and probably
> most will have decking 2. More than 6 seems overkill to me.
>
> Teos.

I don't see how it can be more than 6 runners since they are going to
fuchi "in place of" (See the FASA ruling in J.P. Haworth's message) a
shadowrun.

Now Teos, we'll see who's deck comes out on top. I should have a pretty
good chance now that your deckers aren't doing double duty...

~Jim

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about fuchi industries Uhoh!, 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!