Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Bradley Aaron Rebh <brebh@*****.BGSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Lord Torgo again....He's fun to talk about :)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 11:45:08 -0400
On Tue, 21 Apr 1998, (No Name Available) wrote:

> >>Then what about The Objective, initiation? If a Ganger Leader can't
> become a Ganger Leader, then a Ganger can't become a Ganger and a ganger
> shouldn't be eligible to partake in the Initiation objective.<<
> They're completely different situations. Any Runner can make a shadowrun
> on The Initiation. The bit about being a Ganger in addition to their
> original designations is a *bonus* rather than a requirement.

Funny how you cliped the part where I stated why I felt the way I did.

> >>The Merriam-Webster Dictionary that I have access to also says, "To come
to be", which could be interpreted as becoming Leader of the Pack. I know it says,
become a Ganger Leader, not Leader of the Pack, but I think it's irrelevant what the card
becomes as long as Torgo is a valid target for the card.<<
> Irrelevant? Come on, Brad. Don't you think that the DLOH's choice of the
> words Ganger Leader for both Torgo and Leader of the Pack indicates that
> the card is absolutely NOT intended for use with Torgo? It seems clear.

First, the whole dictionary argument was pretty irrelevant, I mean, look
up shadowrunner in Websters, I was just addressing what was sent at me.

The only thing I know is the is that the DLOH's answered the questions
about Torgo with either a yes or a no. I don't think that you are a/the
DLOH and I know I'm not. I don't try to think like them. I try to see
their intent, yes. But to me, their intent was to simply make it so no
player could have more than one Ganger Leader in play at a time.

> >>No, but a Senator can become a President, both are Leaders, the Presidency is
just a higher version of Leadership. Same goes with the fireman example, though I don't
know their ranking system. As far as the caterpillar goes, your talking physical
metamorphical changes, not changes in profession or personal Leadership.<<
> Okay, at this point you are no longer even debating SRTCG rules. I can
> think of a zillion fictional justifications for Torgo to use LotP, but
> the game rules don't permit it. A Senator *can* become President, but
> the President doesn't. He might be voted to a second term, but then he
> *remains* a President, he doesn't become one.

Again, you only address what you have to work with. And thankyou for
agreeing that _at_least_ fictionally, LT should be able to have the card
played on him.
And remember, without the fiction, where would the meat of the game lie?
To me, it's the most important part (next to clean, _consistant_ game play
that is).

> >>You may have won as far as what FASA thinks about it (which to a lot of
people is all that's important), but, IMHO, it's still a crappy ruling that I'd like to
see thought out some more.<<
> To put it another way (I suspect), you think that the card should work
> differently than how it is intended. No offense, but it seems to me
> that's what you're saying. I think that FASA's ruling is absolutely
> consistent with the card text…if not logical in fictional terms. The
> latter seems to be the source of your frustration.

You're pretty certain you know the intent of a card. Not saying you're
wrong here, but I think I along with a very few lurkers have posted some
amazing arguments both fictionally and logically for why it should be
allowed. These fictional and logical viewpoints point to a better intent
for the card (at least the one that you and your associates can provide).
The only thing we know from the DLOH's is that they don't think the LotP
card should be played on Torgo, they have their own reasons. They have
also been wrong/contradictory/inconsistant before. That wasn't a slam, I
can only imagine trying to run a card game and try to figure out how each
card will effect the others, it would be pure hell. Just look at the
Runners on Retainer ruling.



Bradley Aaron Rebh


920 E.Wooster #4
Bowling Green, OH 43402


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.