Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Paolo Falco the FoxMaster" <Falco@****.it>
Subject: Re: FASAMike, and sorry! :)
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 01:38:59 +0200
On 13 Jul 96, Mr. E wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Jul 1996, Paolo Falco - Seen a Fox? wrote:
>
> > We could ask him if you could ground through quickenings,
> > then let him see what mess it provokes!!!
>
> You know, I'll understand some of this. Whats the point of
> bringing up the whole grounding/quickening thing again when it
> really doesn't matter. Just allow it if you want to or don't.

That's exactly what I said from the start. :)

> As long as the players and GM agree beforehand, it really
> doesn't matter.

And players should (MUST) always agree with the GM, shouldn't
they ? <grin>

> Sorry for the ranting. I'm just getting tired of hearing about
> this thread. And it's also 3:30 am. Sorry.

Yes, it was just a joke, sorry! :)

I was meaning that we could ask him *JUST* to let him see by
himself what kind of reactions (nervous, tired, angry) a simple
rule discussion can have on a whole list. I actually don't care
if you can ground through quickenings. I just find funny the
fact that as soon as somebody says "Grounding through
quickenings" the whole list seems to explode.

A shadowrun-emailing equivalent of a well-placed claymore mine,
I guess. you touch it, the world goes pyrotechninc :)

------------------------------------------------------------------
Paolo Falco | "I closed my shop and you brought only ONE
Ironbound Section | ball?" (from "Clerks" - and My Experience)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Skater's Site And Generally Paradoxal Poetry Page With Lemmings at
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/2717
------------------------------------------------------------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about FASAMike, and sorry! :), 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.