Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Here's a couple of questions
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 02:02:01 -0700
---Justin Marcinkus wrote:
> 1) Is it alright to search through your lost pile at whim?

No official ruling, and there are cards like Chop Shop that let you
pull items from it, so I'd say you can if you feel the need.

> 2) Alright, I've got an objective up that states "awakened
challenges can
> not be sleazed," and I encounter an _awakened_ challenge that states
> [yadah yadah yadah] challenge is automatically sleazed." So, which
> takes precedence?

The Objective.

> 3) Is "Sleep" cool to play during runner to runner combat? The card
> that it "affects only Awakened and Personnel Challenges." However,
isn't a
> runner akin to Personnel?

No. Personnel explicitly say personnel. Sleep is used on challenges

> 4) And the silliest question... How exactly does fatigue work? Ok, I
got a
> runner with a 6/6 threat rating. He takes 5 points of damage. This
> him a modified threat rating of 1/1. Now, there's a card in effect
> "doubles the effects of fatigue." This means that the runner's threat
> rating is an effective -4/-4. At any point in time, is the runner
> My gut instinct is NO, since the actual damage hasn't exceeded the
> value. However, some chummers of mine seem to read the rules

I know the rule book says to subtract Fatigue from both Attack Value
and Body, but it makes more sense to me to think of it this way:

For figuring this count fatigue as only reducing the Attack Value. The
Attack Value cannot drop below zero. No funky healing someone by
hitting them with a negative Attack Value. :o)

Fatigue doesn't actually decrease your Body Rating, it's just that
when damage counters equal or exceed Body Rating you're dead.

However, I'm gonna bounce this one off FASA as well.

-== Loki ==-

Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at


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.