| From: | Felix Hoefert <FHoefert@********.DE> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: runner on runner combat (was Re: Amerindian Expansion) |
| Date: | Thu, 9 Jul 1998 21:59:16 +0200 |
>
> At 12:41 AM 7/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
> >>>I think the spiritīs user always has the choice wether to use it or
> >>>not, even when heīs directly attacked. ---Felix
> >>
> >>The rule book states that drones and spirits are considered runners
> >>for combat situations. And in a runner vs. multiple runners combat the
> >>single runner gets to deside where his damage goes. So I would
> >>think that if cannonball goes up against roadrash with two dobermans
> >>cannonball can assign his 5 damage to roadrashes 5 body and kill him and
> >>his two drones... of course cannonball takes 16 damage from the drones
> >>and dies bigtime as well.
> >>
> >>This is how I interpet the rules anyway
> >
> >
> >Nope, the shaman/rigger can decide to use the drone(s)/spirit(s) instead of
> >his own threat rating in combat. The player can choose whether the runner or
> >the drones will fight. That is one of the things that makes them usefull.
> >
> >
> Direct from the online rulebook at
> http://www.fasa.com/Shadowrun/SRTCG/SRTCGRules/SRTCGRulesTOC.html:
> "If a single Runner is fighting against several opponents, the single
> Runner's owner chooses where to allocate the damage."
> Since spirits/drones are treated as runners in combat, if Cannonball goes
> up against Roadrash, Cannonball can apply his damage to directly to
> Roadrash without going through the two drones first.
>
IMHO the Runner using the Drone or Spirit isnīt even near the attacker,
but controls his D/S remotely. So the attacker doesnīt have the option
to attack him. How would a Runner use his Ally Spiritīs ability to
absorb all damage from one source if the attacker could choose to kill
off the Conjurer first? Using it to simply prevent partial damage (that
wouldnīt kill the Conjurer) would make the Ally Spirit a lot weaker than
its cost implies. This is just my interpretation, the way we handle
these situations, but I believe Iīm correct. ---Felix
