Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Norman McLeod <mcleodn@***********.NET>
Subject: Re: SoC
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 00:28:34 -0400
>> > Tony goes to Nerps! a copy of Muscle Replacement for Skwaaaaaark
>> > to find Nerps! is a copy of his Glitz's Walther Palm Pistol
>instead. :o)
>> You couldn't do this, as the Weather Palm Pistol is not a legal
>target for you can't put a NERPS! of any non-cyberware card on
>Skwaaaaaark any way (IMHO anyway)
>If you read Nerps, the target is a gear card to be copied not a Runner
>it's given to. So what I'm doing in the case is making the Nerps gear
>someting that can't be given to Skwaaaaaark. He could give the Walther
>to a Thrash he has out, or possibly have to hold onto the gear in his
>hand until he puts out another Runner. (As was in some of my other

All I'm saying is that to play NERPS!, you must choose a runner to put it
on, and I don't think that some one should be able to effectively change the
receiving runner by changing the card. I don't think that they should be
able to SoC the NERPS! (Already headed to your Skwaaaaaark, too late to
change that) into something your Skwaaaaaark couldn't hold. I don't play
that you can go back on your decisions after they've been said out loud,
"I'll play a Muscle Replacement on Fastjack" "I'l play a Cyber-psychosis on
him" "Never mind that, that was stupid anyway, I'll play Beretta instead."
You get the idea. Personally, I think that the whole reason that I dissagree
with you comes from what we agree on, that SoC shouldn't be able to change
the runner that NERPS! is going to. I just think that you shouldn't be able
to either.

>> > Now here's the twist. Let's say Tony is again Nerpsing the H-man's
>> > Muscle Rep for his Skwaaaaaark. I toss out SoC and instead target it
>> > to duplicate my Ice Queen's Redirect Datatrail. Tony doesn't have
>> > Deckers out. Can he tuck the Nerps'd RD back in his hand for when he
>> > can get Caeser out? Does it stay a copy of RD in that case?
>> Once again, as Skwaaaaaark can't carry the RD, IMHO you couldn't do
>this, RD not being a legal target
>Skwaaaaaark's not the target of Nerps, gear is (read the card text). I
>don't see why I couldn't target any gear in play with Nerps. The
>player's out shouldn't affect this, just whether they can then be
>equipped with it or not. If I only have a Skwaaaaaark on the table,
>I'm still able to draw one of the spells I put in my deck because of
>the three mages in there aren't I?

I agree, Skwaaaaaark is not the target of NERPS!, but he has already been
chosen to receive the gear, which means I think that the whatever gear it
ends up as must end up going to him.

>> > Same type of scenerio except I know Tony doesn't have any Mages in
>> > deck so I target Nerps on my Tempest's Combat Fetishes. Does Tony
>> > discard the Nerps in this case, as he has no practical way to use
>> > CF copy?

See above. IMHO I don't think you can do that, as the NERPS! should have to
stay a Gear that the runner can hold. It is exactly the same situation as
above. Skwaaaaaark is not a mage, so the CF couldn't be played on him, and
they aren't a legal target for the SoC

>> > Ok, a different twist on SoC. Sudden Goblinization (SG).
>> >
>> > Tony is wanting to beef up Turbo a bit, and tosses out SG while
>> > that Turbo is monkeying-out and becoming an ork. I think it'd be
>> > interesting a different way. If I use SoC on his SG, can I target
>> > H-man instead and make him a troll (thus taking his skills)? Is the
>> > choice of race part of the targetting of the card, or since Tony had
>> > already said it was to make Turbo an ork as the card is coming
>out, is
>> > the race already locked in? (Potential speed/slap-fest issue.)
>> I think that would depend on when you played the NERPS!, IMHO if you
>played it before he stated which race, then he would still get to
>chose, if after, then it's too late

SoC only changes the target of the card. In this case, the target is the
runner involved, not the type of runner they will become.


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.