Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Close Combat (Gurth) T.Sp. [semi-OT]
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 11:46:06 +0100
Khayman said on 20:10/ 7 Jun 97...

> > As far as I'm concerned you can make one attack per Complex Action, so the
> > defender will only need to defend once.No, no, no. I can see it's many years
ago. See, you stated that one could
> attack with fx 2 arms and one foot (gotta stand ;).

Ever played Duke Nukem 3D? Select weapon 1 (foot), and then press Fire and
Kick at the same time :)

> That's three attacks!
> Sorry to bug with this, but I'm sure that... THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!

Well, you could always forbid it and say only one attack is allowed per
Combat Phase. Or you could give a +2 TN modifier for each additional
attack, and let the defender defend against any (s)he wants to, at the
same modifier.

> BTW it's damn good to hear your voice again. Ever since I began using Pegasus
> as rec. by you >:| none of my mailings to the list have made to the list!!
> And now I'm using NS agian with an interface from the deepest pits of Hades!
> <grown man cry at his keyboard> ;)

Are you sure all the settings are right? If they're not, chances are
messages won't get sent correctly.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Well that's allright now, you don't listen to me anyway.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Close Combat (Gurth) T.Sp. [semi-OT], you may also be interested in:

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.