Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: mamos@*****.com (Mike Amos)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 12:39:45 -0700
> They aren't role-playing products. Full stop. There's no
> debate about that -
> they are not meant to add anything to the Shadowrun RPG.


Okay, I'm totally missing the point then. Why are the name Shadowrun if they
have as much to do with Shadowrun as any distopian ideal (okay they also use
magic too, I will give you that)? So they are basically the bastard child of
some weird licensing agreement that does nothing for the consumer and will
probably do less for the maker? Why would they go and screw with an already
established and known to be hardcore market with something like this? If I
recall you no longer are associated with the Shadowrun product line,
professionally, but give me a little insight. What the hell are they
thinking.
Especially with the price predictions I'm hearing (bear in mind these are
very amateur predictions). I mean people seem to think this is gonna
popularize Shadowrun like Mage Knights supposedly did, although for what I'm
not sure. But as far as I can tell no one who wasn't already a gamer played
Mage Knight, and the only thing that makes Mage Knight even remotely work is
it's really cheap. You can buy a small box of characters for like $10. So
you have enough to start your own little skirmishes. These appear to be a
bit more expensive and will make it unreasonable for the uninitiated to go
out and buy like four to ten of them to have any fun.
I guess what I'm asking is what are these gonna do for shadowrun, what do
they really have to do with shadowrun, and if nothing or nit much why didn't
whizkids save the licensing fee and just make up a new background?

Help, I'm very confused.
Message no. 2
From: justin@******.net (Justin Bell)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 14:45:17 -0500
Mike Amos said the following on 2/17/2003 2:39 PM:
>>They aren't role-playing products. Full stop. There's no
>>debate about that -
>>they are not meant to add anything to the Shadowrun RPG.
>
>
>
> Okay, I'm totally missing the point then. Why are the name Shadowrun if they
> have as much to do with Shadowrun as any distopian ideal (okay they also use
> magic too, I will give you that)? So they are basically the bastard child of
> some weird licensing agreement that does nothing for the consumer and will
> probably do less for the maker? Why would they go and screw with an already
> established and known to be hardcore market with something like this?

They're really no different to the Shadowrun CCG

> Especially with the price predictions I'm hearing (bear in mind these are
> very amateur predictions). I mean people seem to think this is gonna
> popularize Shadowrun like Mage Knights supposedly did, although for what I'm
> not sure.

They repopularised wargaming to a point. And the Heroclix stuff seemed
to sell like wildfire also.

> and the only thing that makes Mage Knight even remotely work is
> it's really cheap. You can buy a small box of characters for like $10. So
> you have enough to start your own little skirmishes. These appear to be a
> bit more expensive and will make it unreasonable for the uninitiated to go
> out and buy like four to ten of them to have any fun.

Why do they need four to ten of them? Isn't this a one on one game,
basically?
Message no. 3
From: adamj@*********.com (Adam Jury)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 14:51:04 -0500
At 14:39 2/17/2003, Mike Amos wrote:

>Okay, I'm totally missing the point then. Why are the name Shadowrun if they
>have as much to do with Shadowrun as any distopian ideal (okay they also use
>magic too, I will give you that)?

Shadowrun is a world/intellectual property that WizKids owns. One of the
licensed products is the RPG that FanPro publishes. This is basically
another licensed product, although it's being published by the owners.
Would a Shadowrun movie or comic book or manga have nothing to do with
Shadowrun? Of course not - it's the same world/IP, and that's the important
thing.

>If I
>recall you no longer are associated with the Shadowrun product line,
>professionally, but give me a little insight. What the hell are they
>thinking.

That's not true; I still do contract work for FanPro [the website] and
freelance work [writing] plus helping out whenever I can spare some time -
which isn't as much as in the past due to my day job, but I'm far from
uninvolved with Shadowrun.

WizKids thinks that they can make money and expand the exposure that
Shadowrun gets by releasing Shadowrun Duels. This has the added benefit of
opening up potential for more licensed products [clothing, movies, tv
series, condoms, etc] - including more exposure for the FanPro published RPG.

>you have enough to start your own little skirmishes. These appear to be a
>bit more expensive and will make it unreasonable for the uninitiated to go
>out and buy like four to ten of them to have any fun.

I don't have the exact details of the pricing schemes, but bear in mind
that [AFAIK] it's /not/ a skirmish game - you play one character at a time,
so your initial investment will be $X where X is the cost of one character.
Collecting the full run of Shadowrun Duels characters will probably be
cheaper [and easier] than collecting a full line of Mage Knight characters.

>I guess what I'm asking is what are these gonna do for shadowrun, what do
>they really have to do with shadowrun, and if nothing or nit much why didn't
>whizkids save the licensing fee and just make up a new background?

WizKids *OWNS* Shadowrun. They pay NO licensing fees to use it. Why make up
a background when you have one that already has a large fan-base and enough
dynamics to make a good game?

Adam
--
| Editor, The Shadowrun Supplemental: http://tss.dumpshock.com |
| adamj@*********.com | http://www.talkinabout.com | UIN: 2350330 |
Message no. 4
From: mamos@*****.com (Mike Amos)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 12:52:10 -0700
> They're really no different to the Shadowrun CCG
I'm sorry, I'm ignorant, what is CCG?

>They repopularised wargaming to a point. And the Heroclix stuff seemed
>to sell like wildfire also
So if this new game has little or nothing to do with actual Shadowrun what
are they going to repopularize. Certainly not Shadowrun.

> Why do they need four to ten of them? Isn't this a one on one game,
> basically?

Well, I would assume you would want more than one character to be able to
play. I would also assume you could have as many in a fire fight at a time
as you want. As I mentioned I obviously don't get the point of these, so I
may be wayoff base. But, I assume if you want to have to Sams versus a
hermetic mage and a shaman I would assume you could.

I just don't get the point
Message no. 5
From: justin@******.net (Justin Bell)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 14:55:03 -0500
Mike Amos said the following on 2/17/2003 2:52 PM:
>>They're really no different to the Shadowrun CCG
>
> I'm sorry, I'm ignorant, what is CCG?

collectable card game

>>They repopularised wargaming to a point. And the Heroclix stuff seemed
>>to sell like wildfire also
>
> So if this new game has little or nothing to do with actual Shadowrun what
> are they going to repopularize. Certainly not Shadowrun.

Unknown until it happens, but I am sure they are hoping the SR universe

>>Why do they need four to ten of them? Isn't this a one on one game,
>>basically?
>
>
> Well, I would assume you would want more than one character to be able to
> play. I would also assume you could have as many in a fire fight at a time
> as you want. As I mentioned I obviously don't get the point of these, so I
> may be wayoff base. But, I assume if you want to have to Sams versus a
> hermetic mage and a shaman I would assume you could.

du·el ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dl, dy-)
n.

1. A prearranged, formal combat between two persons, usually fought
to settle a point of honor.
2. A struggle for domination between two contending persons, groups,
or ideas.


Meaning one figure per person
Message no. 6
From: tjlanza@************.com (Timothy J. Lanza)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 15:09:11 -0500
At 02:55 PM 2/17/2003, Justin Bell wrote:
du·el ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dl, dy-)
>n.
>
> 1. A prearranged, formal combat between two persons, usually fought to
> settle a point of honor.
> 2. A struggle for domination between two contending persons, groups,
> or ideas.
>
>
>Meaning one figure per person

If you leave out the second definition, sure. :)

Anyway... The point is very simple...

A large portion of the players of MageKnight and HeroClix are children.
Eventually, they will grow up and look for something more complicated,
something with customization. The inclusion of equipment in Shadowrun: Duel
gives that customization. Children will move from MK/HC to S:D.

Hopefully, the people that get into Duel will eventually wonder where it
came from. That will lead them to the Shadowrun RPG.

If I'm right, WizKids has an extremely long minded view. This could be very
good or very bad. Only time will tell.

--
Timothy J. Lanza
"When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
Message no. 7
From: loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 21:08:20 +0000
At 07:52 PM 17/2/2003, Mike wrote:
> > They're really no different to the Shadowrun CCG
>I'm sorry, I'm ignorant, what is CCG?

Collectable Card Game, Tragic: the gathering, Vampire: The eternal struggle
with boredom... that sort of stuff
As you can probably guess I don't like CCGs, however at GenCon UK last year
The CCG area (I'd guess) was about twice the size of the RPG area, and bear
in mind that a CCG is only two players.
Several players I know have come into the hobby through magic, hey WotC
even gave starter decks free to school libraries in the UK at one point.
The problem is that they're like Computer games, they encourage the idea
that you can build the ultimately hard character, that it's all about
combat and that it's possible to win.
Still we're trying to retrain them <Grin>.

> >They repopularised wargaming to a point. And the Heroclix stuff seemed
> >to sell like wildfire also
>So if this new game has little or nothing to do with actual Shadowrun what
>are they going to repopularize. Certainly not Shadowrun.

It doesn't use the Shadowrun rules system and it (as its name suggests) is
based in one on one combat, but it is still based in the Shadowrun world,
some of the people who start with it will hear about people like us. They
may even be tempted to find out what else the world has to offer.
So no matter how much contempt you have for Shadowrun: Duel if a newbie
player turns up to your session with an action figure in his bag don't take
the mickey and try to hide your disgust, this player might really get into
the game and turn into one of your best players.
Just think what most players today think about D&D (with the free set of
dice in the box), Tunnels and Trolls and whatever other games got us
old-timers into the hobby.

> > Why do they need four to ten of them? Isn't this a one on one game,
> > basically?
>
>Well, I would assume you would want more than one character to be able to
>play. I would also assume you could have as many in a fire fight at a time
>as you want. As I mentioned I obviously don't get the point of these, so I
>may be wayoff base. But, I assume if you want to have to Sams versus a
>hermetic mage and a shaman I would assume you could.

Yes but you don't need to have a choice of half a dozen to have fun. You
and your friends buy different ones, based on the look, and you play
against all of them.
They don't give you roleplaying, but they might give you a door into
roleplaying.


--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ P! L E? W++ N o? K? w+ O! M- V? PS+ PE-()
Y PGP? t+@ 5++ X- R+>+++$>* tv b+++ DI++++ D+ G++ e+ h r* y+>+++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+
Message no. 8
From: mamos@*****.com (Mike Amos)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 14:14:53 -0700
> Collectable Card Game, Tragic: the gathering, Vampire: The
> eternal struggle
> with boredom...

Oh yeah, I owned a deck of one of those once. I think it was called
Netrunner. I think it stuck around a whopping 6 months. I played it with the
only other human I knew that had it. It could be a lot of fun. I have no
idea where the cards are now. Other than that one game I have never been
interested in theses. I have had two seperate decks of Magic cards. Both
sets given to me by people who had way to many of some cards. So they gave
them to me. In both cases I played about 3 hours worth of games against the
people I got the cards from. In the first case I kept them for a while. I
eventually sold the deck for a few bucks. The second set I gave back before
I left cause I knew I had no interest in playing again.

I still wonder what happend to those Netrunner cards.
Message no. 9
From: zebulingod@*****.com (Zebulin Magby)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 13:45:20 -0800
"Mike Amos" <mamos@*****.com> wrote:
>
> Oh yeah, I owned a deck of one of those once. I think it was called
> Netrunner. I think it stuck around a whopping 6 months. I played it with
the
> only other human I knew that had it. It could be a lot of fun. I have no
> idea where the cards are now. Other than that one game I have never been
> interested in theses. I have had two seperate decks of Magic cards. Both
> sets given to me by people who had way to many of some cards. So they gave
> them to me. In both cases I played about 3 hours worth of games against
the
> people I got the cards from. In the first case I kept them for a while. I
> eventually sold the deck for a few bucks. The second set I gave back
before
> I left cause I knew I had no interest in playing again.
>
> I still wonder what happend to those Netrunner cards.
>

I still have both decks of mine. Can get a little four player action going
if I had the inclination. It was fun...but never went anywhere because of
the monster that is Magic.

Z
Message no. 10
From: annachie@********.com.au (Paul)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 08:59:36 +1100
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zebulin Magby" <zebulingod@*****.com>
To: "Shadowrun Discussion" <shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then


> "Mike Amos" <mamos@*****.com> wrote:
> >
> > Oh yeah, I owned a deck of one of those once. I think it was called
> > Netrunner. I think it stuck around a whopping 6 months. I played it with
> the
> > only other human I knew that had it. It could be a lot of fun. I have no
> > idea where the cards are now. Other than that one game I have never been
> > interested in theses. I have had two seperate decks of Magic cards. Both
> > sets given to me by people who had way to many of some cards. So they
gave
> > them to me. In both cases I played about 3 hours worth of games against
> the
> > people I got the cards from. In the first case I kept them for a while.
I
> > eventually sold the deck for a few bucks. The second set I gave back
> before
> > I left cause I knew I had no interest in playing again.
> >
> > I still wonder what happend to those Netrunner cards.
> >
>
> I still have both decks of mine. Can get a little four player action going
> if I had the inclination. It was fun...but never went anywhere because of
> the monster that is Magic.
>
> Z
>

Strangely enough, my Netrunner cards are on my bedside table, because I was
reminising (sp?) about them the other night. Now if I can only find the
rule book :)

Ananchie
Message no. 11
From: silvercat@***********.org (Jonathan Hurley)
Subject: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 06:51:59 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com
[mailto:shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: 2003-February-17 17:00
To: Shadowrun Discussion
Subject: Re: Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then

Strangely enough, my Netrunner cards are on my bedside table, because I
was
reminising (sp?) about them the other night. Now if I can only find the
rule book :)

Ananchie
-------------------------------
Let me see if I can find a spare and figure out a way to get you a copy.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Shadowrun: Duels, I'm really confused then, 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.