From:	Michael/Tamara Pease-Lorenz <treehugr@****.ON.ROGERS.WAVE.CA>
Subject:	Re: GAQS: Jim Nelson's reply to Brett Barksdale's post
Date:	Wed, 17 Sep 1997 18:32:13 -0400

Loki wrote:
> > them. GAQS is a single card that seems to be used differently by
> > virtually every player I have met, and most ppl on this list have
> their
> > own definition for its play. <just re-read the posts>
>
> It's a multi-use Stinger, what's wrong with that?
> It's a Stinger and thus playable at a myriad of different times.

Loki, I appreciate your forthright manner in how you are addressing
this. My point is not that I am saying that this is a *game breaking*
card. I am merely saying that most ppl I know, and nearly ALL the posts
regarding GAQS have displayed a vast amount of confusion surrounding the
card. I wanted a simple ruling to know whether or not the card could be
played at will. The groovey guys at FASA have done so, it along with all
Stingers can be.
I may not agree, but I am quite satisfied in the knowledge that I am
playing the game as it is meant to be played. I just wanted some
clarification and after doing my little rain dance I seem to have
acheived it :-)

> Actually they've done just that. A number of cards are slated for a
> rewrite of the text in the second printing (Hand Razors and Magloacks
> are just two examples.) As for Stiners and Timing, the following comes
> from the official FASA FAQ v2.0 to be posted on their webpage sometime
> today (and that I've mentioned before I also have a MS Word DOC of):

Well, groovey! I'm actually glad that I can make my voice heard across
the Net and perhaps have a positive influence on the game. Thanks for
passing along all of our views, even if some are more disparaging then
others.

Tamara :-) off looking fer a new "horse to beat" :-)