B-r-e-t-t-o-n-i-a-n-s, really why not?

[Darkson]

[inkpwn]

Darkson, you forgot the giant floppy head feathers.

[txapo]

I actually would like bretonians to become oficial, and love plasmoid's work. But it wasn't as a poling option so i had to vote for "don't mind as long as well designed"

[plasmoid]

Joemanji said:

Now Plasmoid has, over many years, come around to this view somewhat and toned down the player names in his roster.

Completely - actually.
The MBBL version of Bretonnians is based on Bretonnian society, not the Bretonnian army.

Oh, and Darkson, if that's what you think Bretonnians would look like, then I totally understand your dislike of Bretonnians.

Edited for poor choice of words to sound less insulting.

Cheers
Martin

[Darkson]

No, just the limit of my google-fu.

[Ullis]

Plasmoid's version is excellent. I've never tried it myself but have played against it multiple times. The Fend linos are a really interesting twist.

[ZootSuitJeff]

The Human team does not have Flagellants or Pistoliers for example.

Hey how about we make an Empire roster with Flagellants and Pistoliers?

[inkpwn]

The Human team does not have Flagellants or Pistoliers for example.

Hey how about we make an Empire roster with Flagellants and Pistoliers?

I am converting a sigmar team that uses the flaggarant with a flaming head as a runner and the rest as lineman, backed up by warrior priests in the other positions.

[tzoscey]

flagellants would be
0-2 6 3 3 7 wild animal, dauntless, loner
taking the position from 2 catchers

pistolier , a starplayer with the access to bombadier ability

[inkpwn]

flagellants would be
0-2 6 3 3 7 wild animal, dauntless, loner
taking the position from 2 catchers

pistolier , a starplayer with the access to bombadier ability

Catch a bullet?

[Niebling]

Well seeing as I am the author of this playbookhttp://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/playbooks ... aybook.pdf I guess its no surprise what I think

I am missing an option to vote, hell yes we need a Brettoian team! very strange to make a poll with 4 choices that are very negative toward the Brits and one choice thats neutral, I meen who cant vote yes to a choice that goes sure if its well designed....

So poll aside, Plasmoids Brits team is well designed and deserves to be a part of the BB universe

[Danzeru]

I think we're getting off topic here with the talk of an Empire team

Now this is my first post on TFF, I've followed a few topics here and there but I'm speaking out here because I find it necessary.

The latest roster designed by Plasmoid is fantastic. I think a few people mentioned it but there was no "I love it" option in the poll which had me disappointed. Also the poll is a little bit confusing/poorly designed, why not just have yes/no options? People could justify their answers by posting surely? But I digress as this isn't the point of my post.

Brets don't play anything like a Human team and anyone who says so is just outright lying to themselves. "Why have Brets when we have Humans?" is just silly, they're nothing like Humans in how they play. "Why have Brets when we don't have Empire?" is also silly as there are many Human nations such as Kislev, Norsca (which has its own team) and Araby. "Human" doesn't mean Empire but it doesn't mean we can't add more subcategories, as I mentioned we already have Norse. With a Human team you could make a team from Araby and stylize much in the same way people are suggesting we do with Brets.

But why do that when we have this fantastically designed roster that's been playtested to all hell and is fantastic fun? They are a lot more dissimilar to Humans than some similarities we see in BB (Elves/HElves, etc) but that's not the point either.

The point is that they play a unique running game which is, as I said, great fun to play and to play against. Catch on the knights favours a very hand off oriented game and MA8 though quite a lot for a Human, I don't think is really too much of a stretch of the imagination when you think that technically a Human Blitzer who rolls a 10 on skilling up can have it. The MA8 makes them as a team and I think is a nice representation of a Knight's charge. This roster, as plasmoid mentions, does not represent Bret military but Bret feudal society as a whole which I think is captured rather well. Each Yeoman has his Knight (0-4 of each) and thus is his squire.

They are also the ONLY team to make use of some new skills arriving in LRB5, Peasants with fend and Yeomen with wrestle. I think this adds a lot of spice to the game and brings in some new flavour to our otherwise old selection of teams.

So many people give Brets stick because they see other people do it and just jump onto the bandwagon. Some people give them trouble because they like the fact that BB hasn't had a team added to it in ages and are afraid of change. But as the rulebook changes and more skills are added, it's normal for some teams to change and for new arrivals to be designed. And then some people say no to them because they just don't like them but I don't see them ruining the fun for anyone. I mean imagine Dwarves had never existed and were introduced now? That would be a totally different story.

Wow, this post is cluttered... I apologise.

[Tank]

I dont get what people have against a Bret team, the more teams we have to choose from the better, as long as they offer a new playstyle and the Brets do just that. Its a well designed roster and it introduce some of the new skills.

If you dont think that the Brets deserve a team cause we have humans, i guess you hate nurgle teams, cause they are just a bad verison of chaos. But it would be nice with some real arguments why you hate it instead of just posting a picture. I always thought BB was played by and older age group, I guess I was wrong.

[Ullis]

I mean imagine Dwarves had never existed

It's such a beautiful dream. If only...

On topic, you also forgot Amazons as a human team.

[Skarsnikk]

But it would be nice with some real arguments why you hate it instead of just posting a picture. I always thought BB was played by and older age group, I guess I was wrong.

Tongue in cheek my firend, tongue in cheek.