Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Crane <jack9@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: A few queries
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 14:04:06 -0800
At 11:32 AM 12/31/97 -0700, you wrote:
>This is the rules excerpt:
>Some pumpable cards increase the card's Attack Value but lower its Body:
>for example, +2/. Pumping such a card until the Body drops to 0 kills
>the card. Trash a card with a modified Body of 0 after the card inflicts
>damage.
>
>Since there is no mention of negative body, I am assuming you must stop
>at 0.
>But I don't see anything specific about pumping cards below zero.
>-Chris-
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Norman McLeod [SMTP:sauta@******.COM]
>>Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 1997 1:41 PM
>>To: SRCARD@********.ITRIBE.NET
>>Subject: Re: A few queries
>>
>>> > Regarding pumping - is there any limit to how much a challenge can be
>>> > pumped? Last night we were playing and my friend was able to pump his
>>>mage
>>> > strike force 5 times, making it 16/16 A6!! also - when should he
>>>announce
>>> > he is going to pump - ie can he wait for me to assign damage before he
>>> > decides to pump, and can he then pump in increments while seeing what i
>>>do
>>> > with the dmage, or does it have to all be at once.
>>>
>>> The only limit (besides nuyen) affects thoser challenges with a +/-
>>> notation (Halloweener Hell, Yak Turf, and so on). You can't pump those
>>> Challenges into "negative Body" -- onec they hit 0, you stop
pumping.
>>
>>NOT TRUE!!
>>
>>It spcifically states in the rule book that you CAN pump cards below zero
>>body!
>>
>
>

I agree that there is nothing mentioned specifically about pumping a card
below zero, and I think everyone can agree that cards that can only be
pumped to 0 are Inferior compared to things that can pump infinitely. I
think, for balance among challenges (to make them as evenly useful as
possible), you should be able to pump beyond 0, IMHO.

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.