Is Tackle optional?

[landrover]

And yes, I did a search for 'Tackle' but it turned up about 27 million results.

Is Tackle an optional skill? I am thinking about frenzying Amazon players into the crowd with a tackle-ridden Norse team and would love to surf half of the bitches.

Cheers

[neverworking]

It is, but so is dodge

[Thadrin]

yes it is.
Similarly, the amazon can opt not to use dodge in the same situation to avoid being crowd surfed.
I think frenzy is the only obligatory skill. (barring negatraits)

[funnyfingers]

In a real world scenario, tackle really isn't optional. I think the only person who would not want to use it would have frenzy and would be to set up a chain push or most likely a crowd surf...

If you choose not to use tackle in order to push for a chance at a crowd surf, they would just choose to not use dodge. It really ends up being up to the person with dodge what happens, not the person with tackle.

Anyone have another meaningful example that says otherwise?

[legowarrior]

Why would a real world scenario (ludicrous idea to bring up when talking about blood bowl) not allow for tackle to be optional? Can't we choice how to hit someone in real life, or how hard to hit them, or, if tackling is know precisely where to tackle them, choice to tackle them in a different way? I'm just saying that in the real world we would have a player would have more control of his/her actions, not less.

[Darkson]

I think he meant real life as in when your actually playing the game (as opposed to theorybowling), not real life as in when you go to work.

Poor choice of words though.

[spubbbba]

In a real world scenario, tackle really isn't optional. I think the only person who would not want to use it would have frenzy and would be to set up a chain push or most likely a crowd surf...

If you choose not to use tackle in order to push for a chance at a crowd surf, they would just choose to not use dodge. It really ends up being up to the person with dodge what happens, not the person with tackle.

Anyone have another meaningful example that says otherwise?

The only one I could think of is if you wanted to push a player into the tacklezone of another player so they could block them. If that player was 2spp’s away from a skill or you were trying to get them the cas record for that particular league/tournament.

In that situation you might risk not using tackle to negate dodge on the defender stumbles and it would be up to the other player if they wanted to stay on their feet and get hit by the other player. Would depend on if they had damage causing skills like MB, PO or claw I guess or the other player had tackle.

[Dzerards]

If you were setting up a chain push and wanted to be absolutely sure the player you had blocked remained on the pitch to fill that square you could opt not to use tackle.

I would and have taken a push over a POW if it moved a player into a surf square, I remember one time picking a defender stumbles rather than a defender down when setting up a surf, the other guy didn't twig the danger even after I asked him if he wanted to use his dodge skill.

[DoubleSkulls]

But the defender can choose not to use dodge, so still falls over.

[funnyfingers]

Exactly my point. Even if I wasn't as smart as you, I would be suspicious if you decided not to use tackle and would think that I should not use dodge if you don't want to use tackle.

I would imagine the blocker would choose which skill to use first, correct?

[legowarrior]

I would agree, but I might want to risk it if I need that guy standing for the next play.