Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Jeroen de Wijn <J.Wijn@*********.NL>
Subject: Multi-player games / House rules (was: Re: Deckers and
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 21:05:00 +0100
Loki wrote:

>According to the RBT it's the choice of the Objective's owner to
>intercept first. Then it goes around to his right until someone
>decides to intercept, or everyone's had their chance.

Yes, and believe me that's just about the only way you can play
it in multiplayer.
We play almost exclusively multiplayer between 3-6 player games.
We tried to experiement with interception rules, but that resulted
in total deadlocks, where noone would lay down challenges, and
noone would run.
And since multiplayer games last 2-3 hours as it is......

Anyway, I really feel this game really shines when played with at least 4
players.
We are currently contemplating another experiment: a maximum of
4 challenges on each objective with 5 or 6 players.
This could prove to be a necessity, as one Lone Star Patrol managed
to wipe out a COMPLETE runner team, including Skwaaarg the other
day by being pumped with 27 NuY. Auch!
If an objective has 5 pumpables to face in multiplayer you might
as well not run it, for it will certainly kill your team.
And if you do manage to survive you're probably Wild Goose Chased.
Hilarious for the opponents, but pretty frustrating for the victim.

We have added another house rule:
A bad draw may be called if you have:
-no challenges
-no runners
-neither.

me.
"In some cultures what I do would be considered normal..."
Message no. 2
From: Forrest <eness@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Multi-player games / House rules (was: Re: Deckers and
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 05:25:46 -0700
---Jeroen de Wijn <J.Wijn@*********.NL> wrote:
[snip]
>
> Yes, and believe me that's just about the only way you can play
> it in multiplayer.
> We play almost exclusively multiplayer between 3-6 player games.
> We tried to experiement with interception rules, but that resulted
> in total deadlocks, where noone would lay down challenges, and
> noone would run.
> And since multiplayer games last 2-3 hours as it is......
>
6 players! Wow... I was wondering about that the other day, how to
handle more than 4 players (not that the situation has ever come up
here). With the way the rules are now you have either 3 or 4
challenges on each objective. So with 6 does everyone get to play a
challenge, leaving you with atleast 5 to face on each run? If this is
the case I can see where you would spend 2-3 hours/game. It seems
like it would almost be worth running through the draw deck once to
build "The Team" and accumulate some money. Then reshuffling the
trash and actually play the game :-)



> We are currently contemplating another experiment: a maximum of
> 4 challenges on each objective with 5 or 6 players.
> This could prove to be a necessity, as one Lone Star Patrol managed
> to wipe out a COMPLETE runner team, including Skwaaarg the other
> day by being pumped with 27 NuY. Auch!

I would imagine that 3-4 challenges/objective is probably the optimum
number. Unless you start looking at challenges before going on the
run (recon, browse, etc) and can customize your team, typically 3 is
when you really start to "feel it". Atleast that's what I've found in
my experience. Then again, as I've stated before, I prefer the muscle
type decks. So it's not unusual to go on a run and attempt to just
plow through the challenges, losing 1 or 2 runners along the way.
Using Shopping Cart Lady to save the gear, and Mr. Johnson to get
replacement runners for the next run :-)

Forrest
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com
Message no. 3
From: Jeroen de Wijn <J.Wijn@*********.NL>
Subject: Re: Multi-player games / House rules (was: Re: Deckers and
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 22:50:00 +0100
Forrest wrote:

>> Yes, and believe me that's just about the only way you can play
>> it in multiplayer.
>> We play almost exclusively multiplayer between 3-6 player games.
(snip)
>>
>6 players! Wow... I was wondering about that the other day, how to
>handle more than 4 players (not that the situation has ever come up
>here).
Well, we have always between 6 and 14 people *at all times* willing
to play Shadowrun in the local game shop, so.....
If this schocks you, we even played 7 players once (!)

>With the way the rules are now you have either 3 or 4
>challenges on each objective. So with 6 does everyone get to play a
>challenge, leaving you with atleast 5 to face on each run?
Yes, this is in fact covered by the rules.

> If this is the case I can see where you would spend 2-3 hours/game.
And then you're not even near the bottom of your deck.
Time between turns with 5-6 players, and time spent on runs increases
exponentially it seems...

>It seems like it would almost be worth running through the draw deck once
to
>build "The Team" and accumulate some money. Then reshuffling the
>trash and actually play the game :-)
Never happened here.
I got once down to my last 20 cards after 3 hours. Wow.

>I would imagine that 3-4 challenges/objective is probably the optimum
>number. Unless you start looking at challenges before going on the
>run (recon, browse, etc) and can customize your team, typically 3 is
>when you really start to "feel it". Atleast that's what I've found in
>my experience.
Same here.
>Then again, as I've stated before, I prefer the muscle
>type decks. So it's not unusual to go on a run and attempt to just
>plow through the challenges, losing 1 or 2 runners along the way.
Using Shopping Cart Lady to save the gear, and Mr. Johnson to get
replacement runners for the next run :-)

:-) No chance bud.
If you go for the _plow_ tactic you lose your team.

Typical challenges faced on a run:
At least 12+/12+ A2 Lone Star patrol
Mage Security or strike force 10+/10+ A4+
Minefield

And then you hit a maglock, get Wild goose chased, No Way Out-ed,
GAQS-ed, Blindsighted.

No, the best strategy against that kind of opposition is:
Almost never run until the challenges on an objective have
been weakened by your predecessors and then go in with a good
chance of sleazing somethings as well.
I personally don't make runs any more without stealth and streetwise.
Luckily there are always the _big Guys_ players who
try to run before you, end up dividing 32 or so damage between
the runners and get stopped by a Hellish traffic or Minefield.
Then I come in and get the easy (well... easy) points.
Patient players win in big multiplayer games.
(And there's quite a lot of player interaction as well, which makes
it all the much fun... ;-)

me.
"As I learn the innermost secrets of the people around me,
they reward me in many ways to keep me quiet."

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Multi-player games / House rules (was: Re: Deckers 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!