Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Lone Star Undercover question
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 03:08:55 -0700
So, here's the situation: I've got three Lone Star HQ's in play. My
Boys in Blue are feeling mean, lean, and all pumped up. So are my mean,
lean Challenges -- and my opponent, Toby, has just stumbled across my
Lone Star Crown Control (now a whumpin' 8/23!).

Toby's team is chock-full of Big Ugly Trolls -- two Gore-Tusks, Da
Profezzur, and, because he'd like to think he's running a sleaze deck,
Razorback. That's four Runners, and he doesn;t have a GAQS, so the
alarm goes off.

Toby's just big enough to crunch the Challenge, so I decide to toss off
a Lone Star Undercover - heh, heh, Gore-Tusk always looked like good
recruit material. Unfortunately, the random roll of the dice determines
that "puny" Razorback goes over to the dark .. er, starry side.

Question is this: LSU reads, in part: "A randomly determined Runner who
is present is a Lone Star agent!" Would he then be qualified for
"puffing up" by the Lone Star HQ? (It's not as clear-cut as if it said,
"Treat foo Runner as a Lone Star Runner, and I'm sure it's just flavor
text, but -- thought I'd ask anyway.)


- Matt

------------------------------------
The truth will set you free - but first it's gonna piss you off.
- Kanya Vashon McGhee

GridSec: SRCard / Freedonian Research Assistant
Teen Poets FAQ: http://pw1.netcom.com/~mbreton/poetry/poetfaq.htm
SRTCG Website: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/2189/ccgtop.htm
Message no. 2
From: "Paul D. Ossman" <guggenheimer@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Lone Star Undercover question
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 19:44:34 -0700
At 03:08 AM 7/25/98 Matt b. wrote:
>So, here's the situation: I've got three Lone Star HQ's in play.
<< Snip>>
>[during my opponent's run,] I decide to toss off
>a Lone Star Undercover - heh, heh, Gore-Tusk always looked like good
>recruit material. Unfortunately, the random roll of the dice determines
>that "puny" Razorback goes over to the dark .. er, starry side.
>
>Question is this: LSU reads, in part: "A randomly determined Runner who
>is present is a Lone Star agent!" Would he then be qualified for
>"puffing up" by the Lone Star HQ? (It's not as clear-cut as if it said,
>"Treat foo Runner as a Lone Star Runner, and I'm sure it's just flavor
>text, but -- thought I'd ask anyway.)

IMHO, the card targets a runner who is on a run, that runner remains on the
run and begins knocking heads as a lone star agent. Since a lone star cop
is classified as a lone star runner, this agent would be classified as
well. If he is not classified as a runner, then he is part of the
challenge -- either way he gets the bonus!

Paul O.
Message no. 3
From: David Reis <david.reis@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Lone Star Undercover question
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 17:03:57 -0700
At 07:44 PM 7/24/98 -0700, "Paul D. Ossman" <guggenheimer@**********.COM>
wrote:
>At 03:08 AM 7/25/98 Matt b. wrote:
>>So, here's the situation: I've got three Lone Star HQ's in play.
><< Snip>>
>>[during my opponent's run,] I decide to toss off
>>a Lone Star Undercover - heh, heh, Gore-Tusk always looked like good
>>recruit material. Unfortunately, the random roll of the dice determines
>>that "puny" Razorback goes over to the dark .. er, starry side.
>>
>>Question is this: LSU reads, in part: "A randomly determined Runner who
>>is present is a Lone Star agent!" Would he then be qualified for
>>"puffing up" by the Lone Star HQ? (It's not as clear-cut as if it said,
>>"Treat foo Runner as a Lone Star Runner, and I'm sure it's just flavor
>>text, but -- thought I'd ask anyway.)
>
>IMHO, the card targets a runner who is on a run, that runner remains on the
>run and begins knocking heads as a lone star agent. Since a lone star cop
>is classified as a lone star runner, this agent would be classified as
>well. If he is not classified as a runner, then he is part of the
>challenge -- either way he gets the bonus!
>
I'd have to go the other way on this. The shadowrunning team is already
being penalized enough, losing a runner and then having to face him on the
other side. Think of it this way: Because the runner is undercover, he
does not get the same support as a uniformed officer, otherwise his cover
would have been blown long before.

David
Message no. 4
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Lone Star Undercover question
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 07:42:35 -0700
Paul D. Ossman wrote:

> IMHO, the card targets a runner who is on a run, that runner remains on the
> run and begins knocking heads as a lone star agent. Since a lone star cop
> is classified as a lone star runner, this agent would be classified as
> well. If he is not classified as a runner, then he is part of the
> challenge -- either way he gets the bonus!

Well -- looking at it this way, the Challenge has already received the
bonus. (Since LSU affects Personnel Challenges as well, though, that
still leaves things in the air.)

As you can probably tell, I'm a little bit ambivalent on it. *Both*
answers have some merit to them .. meaning I'd probably go for the
ultra-technical "no". :)


- Matt

------------------------------------
The truth will set you free - but first it's gonna piss you off.
- Kanya Vashon McGhee

GridSec: SRCard / Freedonian Research Assistant
Teen Poets FAQ: http://pw1.netcom.com/~mbreton/poetry/poetfaq.htm
SRTCG Website: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/2189/ccgtop.htm
Message no. 5
From: Noah Overton <NOAH_OVERTON@*************.OM.HP.COM>
Subject: Re: Lone Star Undercover question
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 19:17:28 -0700
<snip>

IMHO, the card targets a runner who is on a run,that runner remains on the
>run and begins knocking heads as a lone star agent.Since a lone star cop
>is classified as a lone star runner, this agent would be classified as
>well. If he is not classified as a runner, then he is part of the
>challenge -- either way he gets the bonus!
>

>>>>I'd have to go the other way on this. The shadowrunning team is
already being penalized enough, losing a runner and then having to
face him on the other side. Think of it this way: Because the runner
is undercover, he does not get the same support as a uniformed
officer, otherwise his cover would have been blown long before.

David>>>
>>>

david i really have to go against you on this. first off get out of
that but the team is already being penalized mood. that is what the
card is for.

and now for you thoughts on undercover agents. look at it this way
that officer is no longer undercover he's turned on you and giving you
the business with backing from the law. he is definitely pumped. he is
about to bust your ...

that my take on it
puckstpr
Message no. 6
From: Donald Arganbright <jayden63@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 09:09:49 PST
Hoi,
Hoi,

>I have a question regarding Lone Star Undercover. The text states:
>"Play during a shadowrun when a Runner (or Runners) fails to sleaze a
>Lone Star or Personnel Challenge. A randomly determined Runner who is
>present is a Lone Star agent! Add that Runner's Threat Rating to the
>Threat Rating of the Challenge and trash the Runner. "
>
>My question is: Is Runners Threat Rating the base attack value of the
>runner? Is it the attack value plus any gear? Does the body of the
>runner also get added to the challenge?
>
>I suppose my problem is understanding what Threat Rating really >means.
>
>Regards,
>Adrian.

Lets say for fun that you fail to sleaze loneStar Crowd control 5/20.
you have 4 runners after accounting for all present gear the runners end
up with the following following stats. 6/7(A2), 2/3, 13/9 (A3), and
10/10. Your random roll goes on runner 1. The new challenge is 11/27
(A2). Thats ugly.

You add each runners total modified threat rating. Taking into account
all guns/armor/and ammunition. If that runner has a pumpable ability
like bam bam or that dwarf runner. It is my guess that the pumping is
not allowed, because no player owns the turncoat runner. The runners
threat rating (not special abilities) has just been absorbed into the
challenge. As for untured spells. I would say that the turn coat
runner would be allowed to use the spells (if applicable). (someone did
that to me and grabbed my shasta with hellblast and that sorta hurt ya
know.)

*** Knife Sharpens on Stone... Man Sharpens on Man ***
*** - Tao ***

Jayden Stormwalker
Donald Arganbright


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 7
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 15:02:48 -0600
:>I have a question regarding Lone Star Undercover. The text states:
:>"Play during a shadowrun when a Runner (or Runners) fails to sleaze a
:>Lone Star or Personnel Challenge. A randomly determined Runner who is
:>present is a Lone Star agent! Add that Runner's Threat Rating to the
:>Threat Rating of the Challenge and trash the Runner. "

:Lets say for fun that you fail to sleaze loneStar Crowd control 5/20.
:you have 4 runners after accounting for all present gear the runners end
:up with the following following stats. 6/7(A2), 2/3, 13/9 (A3), and
:10/10. Your random roll goes on runner 1. The new challenge is 11/27
:(A2). Thats ugly.

That seems a little extreme. Is armor part of the threat rating? It
doesn't make sense that the undercover agent would loose thier armor, but
it also doesn't make sense that that armor would aply to the entire rest
of the challnege (thats a BIG lined coat, to cover a riot squad!) Theres
a huge difrence between facing a 11/27 (a2) and facing a 5/20 + 6/7(a2).
Why not do the "sensible" thing, and have the undercover agent fight
on the same side as the challenge, as in runner team VS runner team
combat? (Realising that "sensible" seems to go out the window given some
card texts)


Mongoose
Message no. 8
From: Mark Peterson <talos187@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 15:13:10 -0800
> Why not do the "sensible" thing, and have the undercover agent fight
> on the same side as the challenge, as in runner team VS runner team
> combat?

The problem there is that the player is naturally going to apply all the
damage to the challenge, hopefully killing it. If he doesn't kill his
own runner, great; doesn't matter, since the runner is trashed. It only
ends the shadowrun and the challenge is ditched. See the problem?
--

peace be thy path,

talos landone
Message no. 9
From: Donald Arganbright <jayden63@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 15:29:03 PST
Hoi,
>
>>>I have a question regarding Lone Star Undercover. The text states:
>>>"Play during a shadowrun when a Runner (or Runners) fails to sleaze
>>>a Lone Star or Personnel Challenge. A randomly determined Runner
>>>who is present is a Lone Star agent! Add that Runner's Threat
>>>Rating to the Threat Rating of the Challenge and trash the Runner.

>>Lets say for fun that you fail to sleaze loneStar Crowd control
>>5/20. you have 4 runners after accounting for all present gear the
>>runners end up with the following following stats. 6/7(A2), 2/3,
>>13/9 (A3), and 10/10. Your random roll goes on runner 1. The new
>>challenge is 11/27 (A2). Thats ugly.
>
> That seems a little extreme. Is armor part of the threat rating?
>It doesn't make sense that the undercover agent would loose thier
>armor, but it also doesn't make sense that that armor would aply to
>the entire rest of the challnege (thats a BIG lined coat, to cover a
>riot squad!) Theres a huge difrence between facing a 11/27 (a2) and
>facing a 5/20 + 6/7(a2).

Ya, its big, its mean and nasty... but its also 4 or 5 nuyen and unique.
So its not like this is going to be happening all day long. It might
happen once. So I can see it just the way it is, its one of those cards
that I really love to play and hate to have played on. The door swings
both ways.

> Why not do the "sensible" thing, and have the undercover agent
>fight on the same side as the challenge, as in runner team VS runner
>team combat? (Realising that "sensible" seems to go out the window
>given some card texts)
>
>Mongoose

This causes problems as in who is the attacker/defender. Who gets
paired up with whom. I like the first method only because it makes
things simpler. Big and Nasty, but simpler.



*** Knife Sharpens on Stone... Man Sharpens on Man ***
*** - Tao ***

Jayden Stormwalker
Donald Arganbright


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 10
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 20:14:22 -0600
:> That seems a little extreme. Is armor part of the threat rating?
:>It doesn't make sense that the undercover agent would loose thier
:>armor, but it also doesn't make sense that that armor would aply to
:>the entire rest of the challnege (thats a BIG lined coat, to cover a
:>riot squad!) Theres a huge difrence between facing a 11/27 (a2) and
:>facing a 5/20 + 6/7(a2).
:
:Ya, its big, its mean and nasty... but its also 4 or 5 nuyen and unique.
:So its not like this is going to be happening all day long. It might
:happen once. So I can see it just the way it is, its one of those cards
:that I really love to play and hate to have played on. The door swings
:both ways.

Ah, well, in that case, its a one time run ender. Seems it could kill
the running team, which (in my experience) imbalnces the game, but heck,
it is random, and only powerful if the runner converted is tough. Still,
I can't see any justification for the challenge gaining armor. If the
runners threat is added to the challenge, maybe you could kill the runner
first, getting rid of the armor (or whatever), then fight the challenge?

:> Why not do the "sensible" thing, and have the undercover agent
:>fight on the same side as the challenge, as in runner team VS runner
:>team combat? (Realising that "sensible" seems to go out the window
:>given some card texts)

:
: This causes problems as in who is the attacker/defender. Who gets
:paired up with whom. I like the first method only because it makes
:things simpler. Big and Nasty, but simpler.

Dealing all damage to the runner first would resolve that as well.
That way actually how I saw it working at first, but couldn't put it into
words (because there is not any standard combat that woks that way).

Mongoose
Message no. 11
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 20:04:38 -0600
:> Why not do the "sensible" thing, and have the undercover agent fight
:> on the same side as the challenge, as in runner team VS runner team
:> combat?
:
:The problem there is that the player is naturally going to apply all the
:damage to the challenge, hopefully killing it. If he doesn't kill his
:own runner, great; doesn't matter, since the runner is trashed. It only
:ends the shadowrun and the challenge is ditched. See the problem?


If the runner is added to the challenge, the runner would have to be
defeated to defeat the challenge, wouldn't it?

Mongoose
Message no. 12
From: Patrick Bourgault <PBourgault@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 08:34:07 -0500
I'd like to know something with this card, which gear cards a 'LS' ex-runner
can use to kill his ex-team ?? Armor, firearms/melee weapons, accessories
(ammo, combat fetish, etc.), spirits/drones, spells. For
spirits/drones/spells, I assume the runner can use it according to his
skills.
Message no. 13
From: Donald Arganbright <jayden63@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 09:12:36 PST
Hoi,
>
>I'd like to know something with this card, which gear cards a 'LS'
>ex-runner can use to kill his ex-team ?? Armor, firearms/melee
>weapons, accessories (ammo, combat fetish, etc.), spirits/drones,
>spells. For spirits/drones/spells, I assume the runner can use it
>according to his skills.
>
I would say that the turncoat would be allowed to use any gear that
they runner was going to use on the run. If the turncoat was lord torgo
with ambidex and 2 katans... then thats a major hurt job right there,
and you suffer. However if the turncoat is cannonball with a vindicator
minigun. Cannonball would add the +4 bonus from the gun, along with his
own threat rating, but could not use the burstfire option, for the same
reasons that I stated that a pumpable runner could not be pumped.
Spells/drones/and spirits threat ratings are still absorbed into the
challenge. However the rigger and shamans attack value would not be
added, just as if they were controling the drones on the runners side.

This is the simplist way I can think of interpeting the card. Its a
nasty card... but its rarity and cost and uniqeness I think make up for
it.

*** Knife Sharpens on Stone... Man Sharpens on Man ***
*** - Tao ***

Jayden Stormwalker
Donald Arganbright


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 14
From: Patrick Bourgault <PBourgault@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 12:22:25 -0500
> Hoi,
> >
> >I'd like to know something with this card, which gear cards a 'LS'
> >ex-runner can use to kill his ex-team ?? Armor, firearms/melee
> >weapons, accessories (ammo, combat fetish, etc.), spirits/drones,
> >spells. For spirits/drones/spells, I assume the runner can use it
> >according to his skills.
> >
> I would say that the turncoat would be allowed to use any gear that
> they runner was going to use on the run. If the turncoat was lord torgo
> with ambidex and 2 katans... then thats a major hurt job right there,
> and you suffer. However if the turncoat is cannonball with a vindicator
> minigun. Cannonball would add the +4 bonus from the gun, along with his
> own threat rating, but could not use the burstfire option, for the same
> reasons that I stated that a pumpable runner could not be pumped.
> Spells/drones/and spirits threat ratings are still absorbed into the
> challenge. However the rigger and shamans attack value would not be
> added, just as if they were controling the drones on the runners side.
>
>
When facing a challenge, a player can distribute the damage on his runners
as he sees fit. Am I right to assume not to include the body and armor of
drones/spirits, since killing the rigger/shaman also "kills" his
drones/spirits ??

Also, am I right to assume that the LS runner cannot, for example, use
Roto-Drone on an indoor/personal challenge ??


> This is the simplist way I can think of interpeting the card. Its a
> nasty card... but its rarity and cost and uniqeness I think make up for
> it.
>
>
Don't forget its limitation : only on personal challenges.
Message no. 15
From: Donald Arganbright <jayden63@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 10:31:15 PST
Hoi,
>> >
>> >I'd like to know something with this card, which gear cards a 'LS'
>> >ex-runner can use to kill his ex-team ?? Armor, firearms/melee
>> >weapons, accessories (ammo, combat fetish, etc.), spirits/drones,
>> >spells. For spirits/drones/spells, I assume the runner can use it
>> >according to his skills.
>> >
>> I would say that the turncoat would be allowed to use any gear
>>that they runner was going to use on the run. If the turncoat was
>>lord torgo with ambidex and 2 katans... then thats a major hurt job
>>right there, and you suffer. However if the turncoat is cannonball
>>with a vindicator minigun. Cannonball would add the +4 bonus from
>>the gun, along with his own threat rating, but could not use the
>>burstfire option, for the same reasons that I stated that a pumpable
>>runner could not be pumped. Spells/drones/and spirits threat ratings
>>are still absorbed into the challenge. However the rigger and
>>shamans attack value would not be added, just as if they were
>>controling the drones on the runners side.
>>
>>
>When facing a challenge, a player can distribute the damage on his
>runners as he sees fit. Am I right to assume not to include the body
>and armor of drones/spirits, since killing the rigger/shaman also
>"kills" his drones/spirits ??

I would agree with this. It makes sence. I would include the body of
the rigger or shaman though.

>Also, am I right to assume that the LS runner cannot, for example, >use
Roto-Drone on an indoor/personal challenge ??

That would also make sence. The drones weren't going to be used there
in the first place so why should they work now.

>> This is the simplist way I can think of interpeting the card.
>>Its a nasty card... but its rarity and cost and uniqeness I think
>>make up for it.

>Don't forget its limitation : only on personal challenges.


*** Knife Sharpens on Stone... Man Sharpens on Man ***
*** - Tao ***

Jayden Stormwalker
Donald Arganbright


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 16
From: Adrian Smerdon <adrian.smerdon@******.COM>
Subject: Re: lone star undercover question
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 09:31:03 +1000
>Don't forget its limitation : only on personal challenges.
>

Actually Lone Star or Personnel Challenges that the running team fail to
sleaze.

Regards,
Adrian.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about lone star undercover question, 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.