From:	hansen <hansen@********.COM.SG>
Subject:	Re: Corporate Challenges (was Re: Suggestions for 2nd Edition)
Date:	Sun, 17 May 1998 00:34:37 +0800

>hansen wrote:
>
>> >A. Expansions could only introduce new ideas for themselves and future
>> >releases. IOW if cards like Lone Star HQ required a keyword for their
>> >effect, like one affecting Challenge (Lone Star) or Elf Lone Star Runner
cards,
>> >they wouldn't be able to touch anything in the Limited Edition. That's
extremely
>> >limiting and would be even worse for such a card in the 4th, 5th or 6th
>> >expansion.
>
>> Nope. Correct it in now.... Remember no matter whatever version u use the
>> ruling always uses the latest print. Eg (M:tg): If you use an alpha print
>> orcish oriflame and try to cast it for 1 red & 1 generic mana in one of
my
>> tournaments, I'd correct u & give u a warning 4 trying to misrepresent
the
>> card (ie trying to cheat).
>
>Realize that this entails reprinting a large selection of cards from
>Underworld, and players deliberately going out and purchasing them,
>solely to correct a 'mistake' that most people don't even regard as
>such. Right now, there's no difference between a Lone Star Patrol, and
>a Lone Star K-9 Unit, as far as whether they're affected by Lone Star
>HQ. Altering the Second Run Patrol to read as a Challenge (Lone
>Star/Personnel/Street/Vehicle) immediately raises the question of
>whether or not Lone Star K-9 Unit also counts as a Lone Star card, since
>it's no longer keyed as such. [This is, essentially, Loki's point.]

Hey... I'd rather erratta the cards on the official FAQ. All other games do
this. The golden rule of CCGs is never reprint limited edition cards (I
think only Star Wars has done it and for 1 card 'Asteroid Santuary') ; I'm
very sure FASA knows this. After all they didn't reprint 1st run
(Halloweener Hell) or UW (Ancients & Spell Lock) when they discovered the
mistake. They added the info to their home page & FAQ list.... It's only a
few cards now.... But it the future????

>Regarding the Ex-Lone Star Runner -- which sounds like a direct lift of
>L5R's Hunter of Naga -- I think you're going about it in too lowbrow of
>a manner. It's not like people read cards with little search-engines,
>only picking up on %Lone%Star%; people are entirely capable of reading
>things in context. Right now, there is no "foo" rule for SRTCG, so it
>avoids the (silly) declaration made by L5R that if it looks like a
>keyword and is in the title, it's actually that keyword. LSHQ asks for
>a Lone Star card, and the ones that fall into that category are
>self-obvious. A card that specifies that it is not ("Ex-") a Lone Star
>card wouldn't be affected by it.


That was an illustration.... pls look at my next point.... And btw some
people do try to abuse these little rulings.... I don't think I need to tell
u what game they play.....

>> The problem with keywords is the flexibility it gives... theres a
infinite
>> amount of keywords out there waiting to be used.... I definatly don't
want a
>> 80 page rulebook just for keywords.... The idea is just to keep them
simple
>> and rather general.... Actually, I'm not too hot with the Lone Star
>> thing.... I mean what about other law enforcement agencies eg Knight
Errant
>> & NYPD Inc?
>> Hmmm... Maybe for such specific groups use the <foo> rule but clarify in
the
>> book on when to use and when not to.... Maybe identify them by placing
them
>> in italics or square brackets or something....
>
>Sounds too much like Decipher's Star Trek and Star Wars system (using
>Lore). Right now I don't see that there's a problem so large -
>including Torgo, Scatter, Lurker, and Lone Star - that a definitive
>"this is a (foo)" system needs to be implemented. Usually once such a
>system is implemented, you immdiately develop or discover hafl a dozen
>cards which break the system, anyway.


I never said about the problem being NOW. I said fix it before it becomes
one. Also 'Lone Star' searched for matching text in the title; what about
'Vehicle' as in Armored Patrol Vehicle and 'Doberman' Patrol Vehicle? (I
realised this after going thru my cards) Why should you be able to reap
benefits for the 'Lone Star' text on say Holmes but not the 'Vehicle' text
on Armored Patrol Vehicle using say Roadrash? This ia inconsistancy in
ruling and should be corrected now.

>Can't say italics or brackets has any visual appeal to me.


No... But they do help clarify.... What do u suggest????? Different color?
Pls suggest what is visually appealing....

>There is already one Knight Errant card out there; since Knight Errant
>is a branch of the Ares megacorp, it's possible there will be another
>card in the Corp War set.


Yes, I know. thats why I brought it up....

>> >Also, keep in mind Runner archetpye keywords are technically in the card
>> >title (rigger, street sam, mage, shaman, decker, mercenary, ...). A
>> >location/objective/challenge referring to a decker, for example, is
>> >pointing to card tile (Ice Queen * Decker) and not the cards actual
keyword line
>> >(Elf Runner). Their decription keyword line merely carries race and
runner
>> >designation (elf runner, dwarf runner, troll prime runner, etc. Thus I
>> >would say keyword is valid for card title and description line.
>
>> So is Torgo a Ganger?
>
>In regards to Loki's post, the word you're looking for is "profession"
>(RBT, p. 19). (Just picking on the language. Challenges have keywords
>and Runners don't, but we'll all end up calling them keywords anyway.)
>
>As to Torgo - sigh.
>
>He's a Ganger Leader.
>
>Take it from there.

That didn't answer my question. My question has a yes/no answer. Is Torgo a
Ganger or not?