Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Noah Overton <NOAH_OVERTON@*************.OM.HP.COM>
Subject: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 14:13:41 -0700
>Besides, in Runner vs. Runner combat, Stormclaw and Sally can use
>their spirits, or their Hellblast. If they use spirits, Razorback, or
>a troll will not even be able to damage them. Stormclaw with a
>Hellblast can take out Torgo even if you roll a 1.

just a thought here but just because spirit is involved in the runner
on runner combat does not mean that the shaman will not take damage.
the owner of the runner get to pick who he attacks.

you know take out the controller of the spirit first. then the spirit
goes away. same with the drones.

noah
Message no. 2
From: Felix Hoefert <FHoefert@********.DE>
Subject: Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 23:45:04 +0200
Noah Overton wrote:
>
> >Besides, in Runner vs. Runner combat, Stormclaw and Sally can use
> >their spirits, or their Hellblast. If they use spirits, Razorback, or
> >a troll will not even be able to damage them. Stormclaw with a
> >Hellblast can take out Torgo even if you roll a 1.
>
> just a thought here but just because spirit is involved in the runner
> on runner combat does not mean that the shaman will not take damage.
> the owner of the runner get to pick who he attacks.
>
> you know take out the controller of the spirit first. then the spirit
> goes away. same with the drones.
>
> noah

I think the spiritīs user always has the choice wether to use it or not,
even when heīs directly attacked. ---Felix
Message no. 3
From: Donald Arganbright <jayden63@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 15:03:12 PDT
Hoi,

Noah wrote:
>just a thought here but just because spirit is involved in the runner
>on runner combat does not mean that the shaman will not take damage.
>the owner of the runner get to pick who he attacks.

>>you know take out the controller of the spirit first. then the
>>spirit goes away. same with the drones.

>I think the spiritīs user always has the choice wether to use it or
>not, even when heīs directly attacked. ---Felix

The rule book states that drones and spirits are considered runners
for combat situations. And in a runner vs. multiple runners combat the
single runner gets to deside where his damage goes. So I would
think that if cannonball goes up against roadrash with two dobermans
cannonball can assign his 5 damage to roadrashes 5 body and kill him and
his two drones... of course cannonball takes 16 damage from the drones
and dies bigtime as well.

This is how I interpet the rules anyway

*** In ruling, the Sage attends to the heart, not the eye ***
*** - Tao ***


Donald Arganbright
Jayden Stormwalker


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 4
From: Norman McLeod <mcleodn@***********.NET>
Subject: Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 00:41:19 -0400
>>I think the spiritīs user always has the choice wether to use it or
>>not, even when heīs directly attacked. ---Felix
>
>The rule book states that drones and spirits are considered runners
>for combat situations. And in a runner vs. multiple runners combat the
>single runner gets to deside where his damage goes. So I would
>think that if cannonball goes up against roadrash with two dobermans
>cannonball can assign his 5 damage to roadrashes 5 body and kill him and
>his two drones... of course cannonball takes 16 damage from the drones
>and dies bigtime as well.
>
>This is how I interpet the rules anyway


Nope, the shaman/rigger can decide to use the drone(s)/spirit(s) instead of
his own threat rating in combat. The player can choose whether the runner or
the drones will fight. That is one of the things that makes them usefull.
Message no. 5
From: David Reis <david.reis@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 14:32:35 -0700
At 12:41 AM 7/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>>I think the spirit´s user always has the choice wether to use it or
>>>not, even when he´s directly attacked. ---Felix
>>
>>The rule book states that drones and spirits are considered runners
>>for combat situations. And in a runner vs. multiple runners combat the
>>single runner gets to deside where his damage goes. So I would
>>think that if cannonball goes up against roadrash with two dobermans
>>cannonball can assign his 5 damage to roadrashes 5 body and kill him and
>>his two drones... of course cannonball takes 16 damage from the drones
>>and dies bigtime as well.
>>
>>This is how I interpet the rules anyway
>
>
>Nope, the shaman/rigger can decide to use the drone(s)/spirit(s) instead of
>his own threat rating in combat. The player can choose whether the runner=
or
>the drones will fight. That is one of the things that makes them usefull.
>
>
Direct from the online rulebook at
http://www.fasa.com/Shadowrun/SRTCG/SRTCGRules/SRTCGRulesTOC.html:
"If a single Runner is fighting against several opponents, the single
Runner's owner chooses where to allocate the damage."
Since spirits/drones are treated as runners in combat, if Cannonball goes
up against Roadrash, Cannonball can apply his damage to directly to
Roadrash without going through the two drones first.

David
Message no. 6
From: Felix Hoefert <FHoefert@********.DE>
Subject: Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 21:59:16 +0200
David Reis wrote:
>
> At 12:41 AM 7/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
> >>>I think the spiritīs user always has the choice wether to use it or
> >>>not, even when heīs directly attacked. ---Felix
> >>
> >>The rule book states that drones and spirits are considered runners
> >>for combat situations. And in a runner vs. multiple runners combat the
> >>single runner gets to deside where his damage goes. So I would
> >>think that if cannonball goes up against roadrash with two dobermans
> >>cannonball can assign his 5 damage to roadrashes 5 body and kill him and
> >>his two drones... of course cannonball takes 16 damage from the drones
> >>and dies bigtime as well.
> >>
> >>This is how I interpet the rules anyway
> >
> >
> >Nope, the shaman/rigger can decide to use the drone(s)/spirit(s) instead of
> >his own threat rating in combat. The player can choose whether the runner or
> >the drones will fight. That is one of the things that makes them usefull.
> >
> >
> Direct from the online rulebook at
> http://www.fasa.com/Shadowrun/SRTCG/SRTCGRules/SRTCGRulesTOC.html:
> "If a single Runner is fighting against several opponents, the single
> Runner's owner chooses where to allocate the damage."
> Since spirits/drones are treated as runners in combat, if Cannonball goes
> up against Roadrash, Cannonball can apply his damage to directly to
> Roadrash without going through the two drones first.
>
IMHO the Runner using the Drone or Spirit isnīt even near the attacker,
but controls his D/S remotely. So the attacker doesnīt have the option
to attack him. How would a Runner use his Ally Spiritīs ability to
absorb all damage from one source if the attacker could choose to kill
off the Conjurer first? Using it to simply prevent partial damage (that
wouldnīt kill the Conjurer) would make the Ally Spirit a lot weaker than
its cost implies. This is just my interpretation, the way we handle
these situations, but I believe Iīm correct. ---Felix
Message no. 7
From: Donald Arganbright <jayden63@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 08:37:23 PDT
Hoi,

>> Direct from the online rulebook at
>> http://www.fasa.com/Shadowrun/SRTCG/SRTCGRules/SRTCGRulesTOC.html:
>> "If a single Runner is fighting against several opponents, the >>
single Runner's owner chooses where to allocate the damage."
>> Since spirits/drones are treated as runners in combat, if >>
Cannonball goes
>> up against Roadrash, Cannonball can apply his damage to directly to
>> Roadrash without going through the two drones first.
>>
>IMHO the Runner using the Drone or Spirit isnīt even near the
>attacker, but controls his D/S remotely. So the attacker doesnīt have
>the option to attack him. How would a Runner use his Ally Spiritīs
>ability to absorb all damage from one source if the attacker could
>choose to kill off the Conjurer first? Using it to simply prevent
>partial damage (that wouldnīt kill the Conjurer) would make the Ally
>Spirit a lot weaker than its cost implies. This is just my
>interpretation, the way we handle these situations, but I believe Iīm
>correct. ---Felix
>
I think you might be a little confused on what Ally Spirit does. Ally
spirit adds +1/+2 to the runner and you may trash it to cancel all
damage done to the runner. In this case the damage is done to the
runner but by trashing the spirit all damage is removed. In the case of
combat spirits and drones, it is as if your on a shadowrun the rigger or
shaman must be present on the run and cannot contol them from the safe
house. And just like in runner vs. runner combat the rigger or shaman
must be present to use the drones. Thus they are a legal target for
damage. It would be like going on a shadowrun and failing to sleeze
ambushed en route. That five damage could go straight to the rigger and
kill off all his drones as well.

*** In ruling, the Sage attends to the heart, not the eye ***
*** - Tao ***


Donald Arganbright
Jayden Stormwalker


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 8
From: "Dean S." <AresZero@***.COM>
Subject: Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 23:42:36 EDT
Sorry about the Delay in my response to this message =)

In a message dated 98-07-10 10:53:45 EDT, you write:

<< IMHO the Runner using the Drone or Spirit isnīt even near the attacker,
but controls his D/S remotely. So the attacker doesnīt have the option
to attack him. This is just my interpretation, the way we handle
these situations, but I believe Iīm correct. ---Felix >>

I know this is Runner on Runner, but from the booklet....

'....when a Rigger uses Drones on a Shadowrun he may not add his Attack Value
to the team's Attack Value during combat. The Rigger, however, is still
vulnerable to attack from Challenges and Special Cards.'

The damage from Challenges is what makes me believe a Runner could get 'em.
Otherwise, it would make no sense how a Feeding Ghoul would have the option of
hitting Mr. Rigger. The Drones wouldn't look tastey, I'd assume.

Just my opinion.

Dean
Message no. 9
From: Felix Hoefert <FHoefert@********.DE>
Subject: Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion)
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 14:25:49 +0200
Dean S. wrote:
>
> Sorry about the Delay in my response to this message =)
>
> In a message dated 98-07-10 10:53:45 EDT, you write:
>
> << IMHO the Runner using the Drone or Spirit isnīt even near the attacker,
> but controls his D/S remotely. So the attacker doesnīt have the option
> to attack him. This is just my interpretation, the way we handle
> these situations, but I believe Iīm correct. ---Felix >>
>
> I know this is Runner on Runner, but from the booklet....
>
> '....when a Rigger uses Drones on a Shadowrun he may not add his Attack Value
> to the team's Attack Value during combat. The Rigger, however, is still
> vulnerable to attack from Challenges and Special Cards.'
>
> The damage from Challenges is what makes me believe a Runner could get 'em.
> Otherwise, it would make no sense how a Feeding Ghoul would have the option of
> hitting Mr. Rigger. The Drones wouldn't look tastey, I'd assume.
>
What the rbt means is that if a Challenge affects a random or target
Runner, you canīt avoid this by "sacrificing" your drone. A simple
threat rating to face gives you the option of using the drone. Feeding
Ghouls will of course frag a Runner, not his drone. But when you fight
it, you can use a drone to take the damage. ---Felix

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion), 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!