Garions Rules Finished

[garion]

Click on the link to see the document. cheers.

[Afroman]

There is just one thing I am not sure about - The slight tweak to Take Root. I might get rid of that. But apart from that I am happy.

How come? It hardly makes them overpowered.

[garion]

I know, but I just think there may be a better way to stop Take Root being quite so horrible that I havent thought of. I think it wqas 2nd edition or maybe some house rules in a magazine at some point (i forget) but when treemen were knocked over there was a rule where you could use the flings to help them stand up again. Something along those lines might be interesting. But I dunno its a tricky one. But yeah it is a very very minor detail anyway. The rest of the rules are as perfect as they could ever be for me really without more play testing.

[Afroman]

Yeah, I remember that rule. It was in third Ed I believe.

Personally I think that the 6 too unroot is a very neat way to fix it. Doesn't add to much in the way of rolling(all another BGs need to roll each turn so why not the trees aswell). and give some kind of hope.

I wouldn't mind one bit if the fling help unroot the ´tree aswell getting up! That way people wouldn't be able to afford to leave the trees completely unguarded! Still feels like a minor buff, but sounds fun and helps counted the bad luck of rolling snake eyes on the take root on the first turn!

[garion]

Cool, well its nice to have your opinion as always Afro. I am leaving like that anyway. It certinaly isnt a big deal anyway.

[voyagers_uk]

I have printed this out to make notes and review Garion, however

1) Traits..... erm no.

other comments to follow

[garion]

Traits for me are always going to be in my rules. They are the biggest flaw with the current rules imo. Without them you get linear and predictable (boring) development paths. You also get people ignoring doubles in favour of normal skill rolls, this imo should never ever happen. Also it allows you to have skills that are very good such as the old stand firm, which was loads of fun which is the most important part of the game, which again I feel the current rule set is seriously lacking in the fun department. I will never budge on that. But Traits aside, I look forward to other comments.

edit: just reading through my rules again and there is one typo which i will change at some point, Stand Firm should read take a St test +1 not an ag test +1.

[Pluisje]

edit: just reading through my rules again and there is one typo which i will change at some point, Stand Firm should read take a St test +1 not an ag test +1.

It's an Ag test at +2 in the current version ? In the teams section a lot of players have a comma at the end of the line on their skill list. To me, this makes it look like there's a skill missing.

I quite like your changes, but for players in my region it'll be to much of a change. I have difficulty just to get everyone to play regular BB .

[garion]

edit: just reading through my rules again and there is one typo which i will change at some point, Stand Firm should read take a St test +1 not an ag test +1.

It's an Ag test at +2 in the current version ? In the teams section a lot of players have a comma at the end of the line on their skill list. To me, this makes it look like there's a skill missing.

I quite like your changes, but for players in my region it'll be to much of a change. I have difficulty just to get everyone to play regular BB .

yup like i said that is a typo. I will change that when i can be bothered lol

I will also remove commas from the players. I think that is just a result of copy and pasting the previous teams table before updating it

I'm glad you like the changes though. Thanks for the feedback

[the.tok]

Hi Garion

I like most of it, though I doubt I will get the chance to actually use these rules, it seems very good to me. I too feel the traits should be back

I have a few details to point out though, some inconsistencies :
The tomb Guardians have a skill named "big guy" that they are the only one to have. Is it supposed to be loner? if it is I don't agree at all
Is there a reason the ogress doesn't have TTM and thick skull?
You changed the GR cost, but it doesn't appear in red
At the beginning, you say that a player has to roll not to get sent off if he has the "secret weapon skill"... which no longer exists

Will check it once more to see if I spot something else

Good work, I like it

[garion]

Yup, all of those are typo errors and nothing more. The big guy skill on tomb guardian is left over from an earlier draft. It shouldn't be there. Will change the wording about secret weapon. Again that is just left overs from an earlier draft. Let me know if you find any other typos. Cheers, and I'm glad you like the rules.

[Rhyoth]

Thanks for your time an your commission. While there are some good ideas in your work, i disagree on a lot of points, mainly :

_ First, i really think you should find a more appropriate name for your ruleset, because the current one sounds way too "official" for a bunch of houserules
(CRP edition "-2" would fit though).

_ Events Table : I think making Blitz and Perfect Defence less common is a bad idea : those two results are very interesting because they force the Offence to setup carefully. Besides, they are rarely gamebreakers against a "safe" Offence setup.
BTW, i'm not a fan of Bad Kick either (too good for the Offence, and make the Kick skill useless)

_ Traits : I can't say how much i hated those : they just gave too much advantage to coaches who were lucky on a very few number of rolls. On top of that, making Traits worth as much as normal skills, seems extremely unfair.
Also, Traits don't make player development less linear : there are as much "viable paths" of development, the only difference is that some paths are reserved to lucky players, while other players have even less paths available.

Personnally, what i find really boring about players development is that some skills are so good they are always taken first (Block/Wrestle, Dodge, Guard, Mighty Blow + Acurate to name a few), while some other skills are so lame they are rarely taken at all.
Now, if you want to make players development more interesting, then just try to make top skills less attractive and poor skills more attractive : that way, you'll create a lot of new "viable paths" of development.

_ Juggernaut : 0% chance of turnover during a blitz ?! Even when making a 1/2 dice block ?! That's just sounds awfully wrong to me : i don't think a skill cancelling a skull should ever exist : Block rolls are already the safer rolls in BB, no need to improve that !

_ Wild Animals : maybe fun at first, but it is unecessary complicated, and it make the game less "fluid" : i'd avoid it.

_ Improvement table : First, i think charging an extra penalty for late skills is, in itself, highly questionnable : imo, early skills have much more impact on the game than late skills (except for a very specific and over-discussed combo, and maybe a couple of other).
Now, charging 40 or 50 k for a single skill is just crazy.
(of course, if you go with this rule, you should obviously adjust all Star Players price accordingly...)

Also, do you really need to remove the option of taking +1 AV ?

_ Star Players :
Htarkh the Instoppable : i think there is a misprint here : in CRP, it is already the best Star Player available for CDs, now he is almost as good as Morg himself for 100k less, WTF ?
Count Luthor von Drakenborg : Dodge should be in red, also, if you give it back to him, you should probaly make him more expensive.

_Rosters :
Amazons : AV 8 and Stand Firm just don't fit their theme, find something else (Fend ?).
Norse : do you really need to remove the Thrower ?
Dwarves : you need a better name for your Bockers (Linemen for example) : Blockers are supposed to be better at blocking than Blitzers, and those guys aren't, plus it avoids an awkward comparaison with CD Blockers.

[dines]

A bit mixed feelings toward this. Some of the ideas are cool, some not so much.

- I think the dauntless+horns combo was too good in LRB4 - it's just silly with gutter runners who can 2d blitz everyone. Skavens are good enough without it.
- You are missing "l" in prehensile taiL in the mutation list on p. 8
- Very long legs: "If they already have Ma1 then" guess you are missing a 0 there - Im a bit worried about that one, again the gutter runners..
- Chaos gifts: Frenzy (gift of Korne) - missing "h" in Khorne
- I like your new mutations, adds nice flavour, but I'll probably think twice about taking one on a CD
- p. 11, the middle table you write Ag, guess it should be AG
- I think you should pay more for traits/double skills
- The Count is too good with blodge ST5, AG4 (at least for necro and undead teams)
- Crazy Igor - you need to write that he can be bitten by a vamp
- Hthark is already really good in CRP, I think giving him ST6 is too much
- Don't think woodies need Deeproot
- Generally the teams look ok

[voyagers_uk]

OK, so I am not going to pick you up on spelling


1- bringing back secret weapon rolls and argue the call... brilliant

2- IGMEOY had it's fans, I have no problem with its return

3- advanced ref - decent house rule.

4- Bank at 150k - I like

5- kick off table changes, not sure needed but ok

6- traits - as before no thankyou

7- Leader into General category - not in favour of this.

8- saying a skill is the LRB4 version is lazy as I personally did not keep copies of the rules so don't know the difference.

9- removal of nega-traits - useful house rule, shouldn't be official

10- taunt - should be part of "Two Heads" imo, as Two Heads has not been improved. I would never take it as a separate skill.... ever.

11- juggernaut change is bad, it would be too strong

12- Wild Animal table is too complicated in game.

13- love mutations being random.... love that

14- gifts - instead of being normal for some of the skills, maybe increase effect by +1 where possible.

15- star player table. re-insert "Mega Star" 126-200 at 6 rolls and take Legend up to 201+

16- also please explain how much +ST taken for a 6th skill costs is it 50k +30k or just +30k it is confusing....

17- Wizard back as he should be... I don't know what the optional team spells are though so cannot comment

18- teams, as have been mentioned above by others not sure if your team suggestions are fully thought out so would be pleased if you could post a justification for each one.. couple of lines for each would be enough.

overall a fab effort Garion.

[garion]

Okay lots of feedback, so just putting my response in red -

_ Events Table : I think making Blitz and Perfect Defence less common is a bad idea : those two results are very interesting because they force the Offence to setup carefully. Besides, they are rarely gamebreakers against a "safe" Offence setup.
BTW, i'm not a fan of Bad Kick either (too good for the Offence, and make the Kick skill useless) Completely disagree, The table has been changed so the biggest game changers are now the least probable, this is what it has always reflected, but due to other changes in the rules are no longer the most game breaking. This is why Get the ref is a double 1 because it used to give free fouls for one team for a half when fouling was very powerful. Also I have received LOADs of positive feedback for this one, so not going to change that, it is just how it should be. Bad Kick has come back because High Kick currently makes Kick Off return pointlesss, bad kick never made kick pointless it just meant it wasnt quite such powerful skill, High Kick is a big nerf to stunty teams, just kick the ball behind them and they cant TTM for example. High kick makes no differece but bad kick does, it often actually gives them a bigger chance of scoring, and good. This is also a stealth nerf for Ag teams. Received overwhelming good feedback here so not changing it.

_ Traits : I can't say how much i hated those : they just gave too much advantage to coaches who were lucky on a very few number of rolls. On top of that, making Traits worth as much as normal skills, seems extremely unfair.
Also, Traits don't make player development less linear : there are as much "viable paths" of development, the only difference is that some paths are reserved to lucky players, while other players have even less paths available. My feelings are clear on this one and luck off the field of play is something i am perfectly happy with, I hate that the current edition has compeltely done away with it. Traits do lead to more diverse development paths by limiting normal skill selection. Also by getting a Trait on a player people end up creating far more interesting and unique players. Yes Doubles and Trais dont add cost, and good. Dont you get sick of playing leagues at the moment and every time everyones team ends up looking exactly the same as the last league you played in??? It is very very boring.

_ Juggernaut : 0% chance of turnover during a blitz ?! Even when making a 1/2 dice block ?! That's just sounds awfully wrong to me : i don't think a skill cancelling a skull should ever exist : Block rolls are already the safer rolls in BB, no need to improve that ! first of all it is Trait so doubles needed and can only be taken by a player with St access, yes it is powerful but it is no less powerful than any other traits. It can only be used once a turn on a Blitz and it gives St teams a weapon against Blodge, in CRP all the agile teams got Wrestle an amazing skill for them but the St teams teams cannot take advantage of it. it helps move away from the ubiquity of Block, it also fits fluff wise. However it may just be better to make it both down to push and push pow to pow. so double skulls can still happen.

_ Wild Animals : maybe fun at first, but it is unecessary complicated, and it make the game less "fluid" : i'd avoid it. Yeah this one has been a head ache fropm start to finish. I hate the current WA rule because its not Wild. But it is very hard to get this right. I would be happy jsut to leave alone really.

_ Improvement table : First, i think charging an extra penalty for late skills is, in itself, highly questionnable : imo, early skills have much more impact on the game than late skills (except for a very specific and over-discussed combo, and maybe a couple of other).
Now, charging 40 or 50 k for a single skill is just crazy.

Also, do you really need to remove the option of taking +1 AV ?

_ Star Players :
Htarkh the Instoppable : i think there is a misprint here : in CRP, it is already the best Star Player available for CDs, now he is almost as good as Morg himself for 100k less, WTF ? I havent dropped his cost 100k? I have just put him back to the 3rd edition - LRB4 version there was no need for this stupid nerf which goes against the fluff.

Count Luthor von Drakenborg : Dodge should be in red, also, if you give it back to him, you should probaly make him more expensive. No need to make him more expensive he is already over priced and I got rid of Side Step and gave him dodge, again 3rd ed - lrb4

_Rosters :
Amazons : AV 8 and Stand Firm just don't fit their theme, find something else (Fend ?). thats wrong it actually perfectly fits their fluff, if you read the amazon fluff in CRP it fits perfectly.

Norse : do you really need to remove the Thrower ? yes, they have too many positionals, no need for all of them, their runners also have the option to function as throwers if you want to, it also helps make the 3 human races more individual, Norse the bash and runner, Human the alrounders, and zons the passers
Dwarves : you need a better name for your Bockers (Linemen for example) : Blockers are supposed to be better at blocking than Blitzers, and those guys aren't, plus it avoids an awkward comparaison with CD Blockers.Agree, I meant to change their name to Longbeard, I just forgot, thanks for pointing that out. Though that isnt true, Blockers are meant to be better at being Blocked or Blitzed, Blitzers are meant to better at blocking and blitzing.