Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some card ideas
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 15:07:18 EST
> > Vitas III
> > Cost: 0
> > Card Type: Special
> > Text: Play on any runner. Add a disease token to runner during the
> > runners owners upkeep. Each upkeep Vitas III does 2AP damage for
> each
> > disease token on the runner. If the runner is trashed then the
> > runners owner may choose a new target for Vitas III.
> >
> > Got the idea from a Jyhad card and modified it a little.

The other way we could go with this is to do:

Vitas III
Cost: 7

Play on target runner. At the start of the runner's Legwork Phase,
roll 1d6, Adding +1 if the Runner has Stamina, and +1 if runner is a
dwarf (Can be cumulative). 1 (or less): Trash runner and Vitas III.
2-4: Place a -0/-1 disease token on runner. Any runner damaged in
hand to Hand combat by a runner with a disease token rolls 1d6,
modified as above. unless the runner acheives 4+, Treat damaged
runner as if they (he/she?) had a separate Vitas III played on them.
If a runner suffers no damage in combat with an infected runner,
there is no chance of transmission. Biotech can be used to remove
disease counters equal to the Biotech skill, but cannot remove the
Vitas card.

This text does a few things:
1) It does away with the kudzo-like effect of passing Vitas back and
forth.
2) It shows the virulent nature without getting all on one side.
This represents the danger of bio-warfare (I hit you with the
stuff, but you get some on me and it ends up slaughtering my
forces while taking only a few (one? None?) of yours.)
3) It allows biotech to help.
4) IT shows the trend SRTCG has had of having few absolutes (even
LotI only has a 50% chance of working.)

On the downside, my version is much too verbose. Can anyone shrink
it down? Comments?

-=SwiftOne=-

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.