| From: | Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Robs Questions - Part 1 |
| Date: | Wed, 24 Sep 1997 15:09:35 -0700 |
> work you've done. I just have specific card questions, and then (hopefully)
> I will be on my way. I have sent a copy of these messages to FASA, because
> I can't find an offical ruling, either at their site or in our collection
> of thier rulings. Feel free to comment, or make any guesses as to what they will
> say!
> Thanks again!
> 1) Reinforcements - Can this card be played on a team that has already
> passed all the challenges on an objectice, so that you could lay down a whole
> other set of challenges that they would have to phase on the current
> shadowrun?
Like any Stinger, it can be played at any time. Obviously, however,
once you start "encountering" the Objective (allocating damage, GAQqing
Runners home, etc) this card is no longer good.
Yes, it's dangerous.
> 2) Wanted - Do you attack the Wanted! character during
> a)The WANTED! character's player's legwork phase
> b)The legwork phase of each opponent?
Player A plays Wanted on Player D's Bam Bam. Player D responds by
Archie McDevenning A's Lord Torgo - the only character A had that's
tough enough to take Bam Bam out.
Player B can decide, during his Legwork phase, to have one of his
characters attack D's Wanted Bam Bam. If there is an attack, Wanted
falls off regardless of the outcome.
Player C can decide, during his Legwork phase, to have one of his
characters attack D's Bam Bam - assuming he;s still Wanted.
Player D, as I found out, can't attack his own card.
Player A, if he's lucky enough to have Torgo unturn with Archie
re-Devenning him, could attack D's Bam Bam, if by some mishap Bam Bam's
still up on the post office wall.
Repeat until a Runner attacks Bam Bam, Wanted is LotI'd, or Bam Bam dies
on a run (the only three ways I can think of to get rid of it.)
> 3) Operation Cottonmouth - The card seems to say that only the owner (the
> person who played the card) can add the +2/+2(A+1) to one challenge.
> This would imply that the person who played the card's team would
> never have to worry about that (because he would never play it on
> himself). Is this correct?
The card seems a bit unclear to me. Yours is one interpretation; the
other is that the owner *of the Challenge* can add +2/+2. I tend to
favor your interpretation.
> 4) No Way Out - Can this be played on a group of runners, after a card (say
> a challenge) sent the runners home to force them to continue the run?
The timing on this one is tricky. Once Wild Goose Chase, say, is
played, the Runners return to the safehouse. They are no longer "on a
run" (unless the Chase was LotI'd.) No Way Out doesn't act as an
interrupt; it acts as a pre-emptive measure. The Runners are in the
middle of fighting the Ancients; you play No Way Out to make sure they
*have* to attack the Dracoform behind them as well.
> b) Subpart b - The card states that the runners may sleaze the
> challenge like normal. If the alarm is already set, the
> challenge may not be sleazed, correct?
Correct.
> 5) Finally - Time Delayed Bomb - What am I doing wrong? This card seems
> inferior to Boby Trap in every way! What is the advanctage of this
> card? It is easier to sleaze, it does not neccesarily kill anyone
> when it blows up, and it may not happen! Does it end the run or
> something? Tell me what I am missing, because I can't even find
> a specialized use for this card!
I'm not sure on the sleaze requirements - I think FASA cleared it up to
read "Athletics, plus EITHER Tech-2 OR Demo"), which makes it a tougher
sleaze. It's not so much that it easily destroys a Runner, but it does
keep them all out of the safehouse (visiting locations or going on runs;
eliminating the usefulness of the Bulldog Van, for instance.) With some
cardplay - McDevens, GAQs, and so on - you can keep the Runners you want
pinned at home; the best 'pone can do is to keep other Runners there to
absorb the blast, as it were.
