101 Alternative Rosters - 20,000+ Games
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:09 pm
The Secret League rosters have now been used in more than 20,000 games.
Have you tried them?
What do you think?
Have you tried them?
What do you think?
Discuss Fantasy football-style board games - GW's Blood Bowl, Impact!'s Elfball, Privateer Press' Grind, Heresy's Deathball, etc. THIS IS NOT AN NFL FANTASY FOOTBALL SITE!
https://talkfantasyfootball.org/
JPB wrote:Back in 2015/16, I spend some time going over the season one rosters, and while doing so I spotted several typos. I went back to it and updated that typo list to season 2.
The most important typos
Fixed all them, thanks for spotting them really appreciated
Then there are some pointers regarding the fluff:
Albion
The source for Knotinthem Forest, Shuffling Woodsday and Ashton Villain is wrong. It's not 1st edition DZ but 2nd edition star-player (unless there is a 1st edition WD I'm not aware of, but also Lore of Nuffle lists 2nd edition under “first appeared in”.
there was a 1st edition deathzone out in 1987 and this is where they first appeared, so the fluff is correct on my Secret League page
Border Princes
It mentions the Badland Baddies as unspecified, however, it is known that a Troll played for them, which may suggest a Greenskin team. However, as this was in 2nd edition, it mustn't mean that, it still could have been a Human Team, it's just less likely.
Its not really clarified as you say, however the badlands are that area so I felt it fitting enought to site them.
Clans (Skaven) in general
This is not as important, but it may be worth noting that Skaven Clans is a Warhammer concept that doesn't exist in BB. In BB Skaven teams are organized by Clan Rigens, and teams outside of this Clan are (most likely) not allowed to play, except perhaps in Skaven only leagues like the Clan Bowl. However, it may be acceptable if remembering that these “Clan teams” may be “sponsored by Clans” but are answering to Clan Rigens (add conspiracies and politics to it if wanted). They could also be themed Clan Rigens teams etc. Actually this is one of the more notorious examples were Warhammer has already almost completely removed and replaced the BB background.
True and false, there were specific clan teams mentioned in citadel journal and Blood bowl annual, while not stricly cannon its certainly fun to have clan specific teams. However you make a good point in making them all answere to clan rigens, I like that and will add to the fluff
Daemon of Nurgle
The first mentioning of the Plaguebearers is not in BB2016 but BBM5 p.6 from 2003.
Thank you, I fixed that, must have missed it.
Estalia
Bilbali Archers are an Elf team (2nd edition Star player p.20).
Another Estalia team may be Real Murdered (BBM12 p.30).
thanks again, fixed and missed that one
Half-Elf
It says that Jordell and Hubris were on the same team (Talon Tearaways) 20 years ago. This is probably a mix up. But I'm not sure where it's coming from. I did stop buying BB products after a first perusal of BB2016. However, based on that quick perusal BB 2016 appears to be in 2494 or 2495, hard to tell, the background is not in a good shape really. However, the one-year Talon Tearaway experiment was in 2499, see F3/20, (which could be the future at this point, unless BB made a leap into 2519 recently (?)). Not sure where the 20 years are coming from? The only thing I could think of is that 20 years refer to their careers (both are from 2482 to 2504 (i.e. up to the point of F3). However, I'm not sure how much value all this (date keeping) even has any more. F3 itself may not even be “official” any more but gone the way of the Dodo (aka “brought up to date”). However, what you could do is change “20 years ago” to “in 2499”.
My fluff is correct here, you can still find this article online Jervis Johnson wrote it, its called cyclone and the paingiver. The 20 years part is however is my fluff. The backstory to these teams emerging/beng plaable is this era of blood bowl is set 20 years after the stuff in the rule book
Khorne
A Khorne team may be Khorne Killers (3rd edition Death Zone p.29f).
Thank you, I knew there was one mentioned somewhere but couldn't find it. Much appreciated.
Lybaras
It says the Dekka's Decomposing Decimators are from WD 94. I never heard of them, which doesn't mean anything, but I'm wondering if 94 is a modern WD or an old WD from 1987? Which may be needed to add to avoid confusion (like “WD 104 (1988)”).
yes it is from from 1987, i have clarified that I mean issue 94
Nautican
Another Nautican team may be Sea Atoll Sirens (BBM5 p.25).
See, Sea Elf in regard to the Southstorm Squids (i.e. either the new fact is ambiguous or there is a contradiction).
The fluff confirms they were once elves but became a sea creature team, so both are correct, Sea Atoll sirens have been added. thanks
Nippon & Northern Nippon
The Nippon Nibblers Halfling team are mentioned in (2nd edition Star player p.26). Btw, there are also the Nuln Nibblers (2nd edition Star player p.53). And I always suspected some kind of mix up/typo.
they are mentioned in the ninja flings page. nuln nibblers are just normal flings from the empire
Pirates of Sartossa
Reefwald Merman may be more fitting as a Nautican Team perhaps.
where did you see these?
Sea Elf
Here it says the Southstorm Squids are now Sea Elf as a face (typo). But under Nautican it says the opposite (they are now a Fishmen team by fact), both relying on the same source: BB2016. It could be both, but I would be surprised as a Fishteam clashes with Warhammer, and the BB policy is to rather remove BB history/elements than confuse Warhammer fans.
see above, it is both fixed the typo thanks
Skink
A Skink team may be Sotek's Word (BBM1 p.27 or BBM5 p.24).
werent they specifically a lizardmen team? either way I have added them thanks
Snotling
Another famous Snotling team may be Snotshire Dribblers (Compendium3 p.21 & 2/64), disbanded in 2491, though.
And a Snotling/Giant team are the No Hawk Jets (4th edition p.59).
I left the snotling giant team out on purpose, however I have added snotshire dribblers in thanks.
Tilea
The Pergamo Pastas appeared in Companion p.53 not Star-player.
hmm you sure? I will need to go dig out my old books to check that one?
Treeman
A famous Treemann team were the Drakwald Evergreens (disbanded) (BBM1 p.39).
added thanks
Von Carstein
Von Carstein teams could be the Drakfang Thirsters (disbanded) (BBM1 p.17 or BBM4 p.6), the Vasey Vamps (disbanded) (BBAnnual2003 p.12) or the Castiron Knights (BBM4 p.6).
added thanks
Valkyries
The Vynheim Valkyries are actually the most famous Norse team (e.g. the former Norsca Rampagers), not a Valkyrie team as such, which is a bit of a leap. However, they did, or could have had, female players (see Zena Blackmane transferred to the Valkyries from the Amazon All-Stars in 2500 (BBM1 p.27), marked as the first Amazon (possibly, but not necessarily, same as female?) player to transfer).
yeah i left them out on purpose because they were too famous and have a number of male stars.
Were
Could mention the Kishargo Werebears (see Kislev).
I decided to just credit Kislev here.
Werewolf
I always thought the Icecastle Wolves (Werewolves?) are a Werewolf team, but I may be wrong. Lore of Nuffle has them as Norse, which makes sense as they replace the Wüppertal Wotans based on similarities (which may be race) according to Companion p.48. Still, it's a
I believe Icecastle wolves are Norse, I would need to go away and double check though.
Witch Elf
The Deadly Nightshades are a Vampire team (see Lhamia team or BBM4 p.5) (i.e. CRP was either at fault with this one or decided to rewrite it).
CRP decided to re-write this, I also pointed this out, however I felt it fine to site both sources
And then there is a longer list of typos and cosmetics, which you may or may not want to correct. The full list is in the following word document: http://www.filedropper.com/proofread
P.S. As I though that there was no interest. I basically didn't bother to probe any further back then, but while doing my archive work I also found two star-player lists on fumbbl. And updated them. Which may or may not be of (historic, perhaps) interest.Garion (red), JPB (original: black, reply: blue) wrote: Then there are some pointers regarding the fluff:
Albion
The source for Knotinthem Forest, Shuffling Woodsday and Ashton Villain is wrong. It's not 1st edition DZ but 2nd edition star-player (unless there is a 1st edition WD I'm not aware of, but also Lore of Nuffle lists 2nd edition under “first appeared in”.
there was a 1st edition deathzone out in 1987 and this is where they first appeared, so the fluff is correct on my Secret League page
They are not mentioned in my copy of 1st edition deathzone (1987). I double checked.
And I'm pretty sure there is only one version of that rulebook (not like the handbook (1986) that appeared in brown & red. However, I don't know if those versions actually differ in content).
If those teams have been mentioned during 1st edition it was not in one of the two rule books. And last, as I said, Lore of Nuffle, lists them under 2nd edition, too. So, in this case, you would need to confirm the DZ page number they appeared on. As far as I know their first (and only) appearance is 2nd edition Star-player p.48.
Clans (Skaven) in general
This is not as important, but it may be worth noting that Skaven Clans is a Warhammer concept that doesn't exist in BB. In BB Skaven teams are organized by Clan Rigens, and teams outside of this Clan are (most likely) not allowed to play, except perhaps in Skaven only leagues like the Clan Bowl. However, it may be acceptable if remembering that these “Clan teams” may be “sponsored by Clans” but are answering to Clan Rigens (add conspiracies and politics to it if wanted). They could also be themed Clan Rigens teams etc. Actually this is one of the more notorious examples were Warhammer has already almost completely removed and replaced the BB background.
True and false, there were specific clan teams mentioned in citadel journal and Blood bowl annual, while not stricly cannon its certainly fun to have clan specific teams. However you make a good point in making them all answere to clan rigens, I like that and will add to the fluff
I know (I even mentioned the Clan Bowl from that article (BB Annual 02, p.34f). I was just playing dumb, deaf and blind with indignation (the perk of the elderly). I also really don't mind Skaven Clan teams as such. In fact I adopted the headhunters team for my own “secret league”. I'm just pissed that GW is so indifferent towards the BB heritage and keeps ignoring/forgetting it.
For example, there is no reason why their articles (CJ 46 & BB Annual 2002) didn't mention the Clan Rigens angle. It's a very simple fix to include a Warhammer element into BB, without undermining and destroying the BB world. However, they didn't do that. In fact they never do that. Either they have no time or don't care. It's just driving me up the walls. I said before they treat the BB background like a red-headed stepchild, either by design, indifference or incompetence, but either way it's unacceptable.
In fact it is very simple to fix adjust and mould the BB background to anything you want. All it needs is a little bit of care, consideration, knowledge and respect towards the existing material.
It really gets me riled up. For example in the team profile of the Gouged Eye they added under (2464) that the “Dwarf Giant coach was too busy to scribble in his book of grudges to offer any comment after the loss”. This has been added to the article in 2004 (Fanatic 5 p.68), and was not in the original (2nd HB p.16 (1988)). In fact, they made several “adjustments” like that. The frustrating thing is, that if they would have bothered to check if this makes sense from a BB perspective, they would have realized how awful that “adjustment” is. Dwarves in BB are notoriously ultra-violent (Dwarf Giants: SP p.5 & 54), consider it their right to bend the rules (aka cheat) whenever they feel like it (SP p.19), blow up entire stadiums (Dwarf Warhammerers: C p.36) and are considered completely & utterly crazy (SP p.26 & 2nd HB p.26). And after a tough loss against Orks they do what: attack the orks, blow up their team bus, blow a gasket in an interview or flame on “twatter”? No they sit down and scribble in their book of grudges (probably with one of their players looking over the shoulder and pointing out typos, no doubt ...) If this is a joke, it's on BB.
As a matter of fact there is no mentioning of the book of grudges in the entire BB background until these Warhammer generals decided that it must be in it, because that's what dwarves do, and screwed over several BB traditions in the process.
The most frustrating thing is how completely unnecessary all this is. You can have a Book of Grudges in BB, just not on the Dwarf Giants*. It even says on (2nd HB p.21 (1988), also (but cut versions) 3rd HB p.43 (1994, intro cut) & 4th HB p.64 (2002, copy & paste)) that they modernized their stuffy image in 2381 to become more competitive (and I always considered that as “violent & cheating”). Now, they are back to a stuffy “book of grudges” attitude in 2464. In what way or form is that an improvement?
If only they had the awareness for the traditions, intricacies & complexity of their own product (i.e. first, to know that the Fanatic articles are “updated” and second, to compare the Eye and Giant profiles, before adding to the one without checking the other).
Anyway, they can always play the “updating and modernizing” card. :sigh:.
*In fact it may actually suit the Grudgebearers background. Like an old habit they can't shake (i.e. they are a bunch of accountants that got bored, and wanted more action, but still do meticulous bookkeeping, despite being BB stars now).
Half-Elf
It says that Jordell and Hubris were on the same team (Talon Tearaways) 20 years ago. This is probably a mix up. But I'm not sure where it's coming from. I did stop buying BB products after a first perusal of BB2016. However, based on that quick perusal BB 2016 appears to be in 2494 or 2495, hard to tell, the background is not in a good shape really. However, the one-year Talon Tearaway experiment was in 2499, see F3/20, (which could be the future at this point, unless BB made a leap into 2519 recently (?)). Not sure where the 20 years are coming from? The only thing I could think of is that 20 years refer to their careers (both are from 2482 to 2504 (i.e. up to the point of F3). However, I'm not sure how much value all this (date keeping) even has any more. F3 itself may not even be “official” any more but gone the way of the Dodo (aka “brought up to date”). However, what you could do is change “20 years ago” to “in 2499”.
My fluff is correct here, you can still find this article online Jervis Johnson wrote it, its called cyclone and the paingiver. The 20 years part is however is my fluff. The backstory to these teams emerging/beng plaable is this era of blood bowl is set 20 years after the stuff in the rule book
My mistake, I was aware of the article (should have been in Fanatic 3 p.20) and just didn't understand the 20 years, but I think I do now. It's from 2017 to 1999, or in BB reckoning: 2517 to 2499, right? I was just puzzled as, a.) that's only 18 years, and b.) I didn't expect you to keep the old tradition that our current real date is the current BB date. (Which is admittedly problematic. The headaches I endured to figure out the publication dates of articles, especially in compendiums, to determine what “currently” means were numerous. Another issue is that constant progress forces constant updates.)
One thing you can do to avoid your fluff outdating itself by default is to change “20 years” to “since 2499”. As the second will always stay correct, no matter how much time passes.
I believe GW did decide to roll back to 2494. Which is a good idea in theory, but poorly executed as they should have frozen the background in 2505 instead (the date of the last publication) which would have been borderline fine*, and kept everything intact. Instead they rolled back to 2494, but used the articles updated to 2504 without adjusting them (rofl). In fact they threw in a few 2488 articles for good measure. Which makes any kind of number in those pieces unrelated and meaningless. Besides, any new coach trying to figure this out will be as confused as I was by 3rd edition (try figure out championships, why some teams never won the Chaos Cup or the chronology of the collapse in that one: total “update and modernize” mess).
This “update and modernizing” policy (aka create new versions of existing articles) is just terrible, as, imo, it only achieves a destabilization of the background (varying versions) and complicates it beyond believe, as they now have to keep track of those varying versions, and they can't even keep track of “single version articles” since 1990. All errors in the 1994 championship list are teams that were “hidden” in the 2nd edition material. And when they went back to do 3rd edition they failed to spot those “hidden” champions. And as the spot appeared to be “open” they put a new team in. And in case they couldn't “overwrite history” they added teams that made no sense within the world's logic (bad luck). I swear, almost every single new “addition” they made to the BB championship list in 1994 is a background-error (how unlucky can you get?).
Anyway, their whole way of going about things is just insane; they decide to declare old material “outdated”, but as that old material basically makes 75% of their background, they have to go back to it, and when they then “copy & paste” it, they have already forgotten all their “updates and modernizations” and create a mess.
Eventually, this treatment makes all dates, events and championships completely meaningless. Everything is only true until they forget and gloss over it. This isn't a franchise, it's the funny papers (i.e. it has no depth, it's just funny: read and discard).
After all, all this “updating and modernizing” only works if abandoning all consistency and integrity. But that means that you have no franchise. In fact, everything they are publishing today is already “outdated”, just wait 10 years.
*the best indicator is Griff's age, and he would be 43 in 2505 (born in 2462). Zug is 46 (born 59). This is too old, but I think it is possible to push the retirement age of athletes by 10 years (from 35 to 45) and explain it with magical massages etc. This isn't optimal, but rolling back puts a lot of material into limbo. In fact the entire modern background (anything after 1994, which is all of CJ, all CP, BBM, BBA, Fanatic and Fanatic Online) and that isn't great either. Especially considering that everything before 1994 is “outdated” which doesn't leave much of a background anymore. However, that may have been their point (i.e. wipe the background so they don't have to bother with it anymore).
Pirates of Sartossa
Reefwald Merman may be more fitting as a Nautican Team perhaps.
where did you see these?
In the Pirates of the Sartossa article under famous teams (after the Salty Sea Dogs)
And Reefwald Merman are mentioned in BBM 6 p.19 (or (copy & paste) BB Annual 03 p.54).
Skink
A Skink team may be Sotek's Word (BBM1 p.27 or BBM5 p.24).
werent they specifically a lizardmen team? either way I have added them thanks
They are listed under famous Lizardman teams but so are the Nurgle Rotters under famous Chaos teams once (3rd DZ). So there is room to make an argument.
My points are:
1. Sotek is a Skink god.
2. They are from the Southlands, a traditional Skink territory
3. They have the “rain-dance gimmick” which makes (somewhat) more sense if the team is amphibious (aka Skink). Well, tbh, it doesn't really make sense, but there is a connection (water-amphibious).
4. The Blood Bowl at Sea article may again stress the amphibious point.
However, it is more a strong suggestion than a solid fact, come to think of it.
If you want to do a check up: All mentions of Sotek's Word, I'm aware of, are: BBM 1 p.27 (twice), BBM 5 p.24, BBA 02 p.16, 18 & 19, BBA 03 p.48 (should be copy & paste of BBM 5). And I have a note saying: German White Dwarf 97 p.38 which may be from a “Spike Magazin” BBM (I don't have 8, 10 & 11, try those) or a Citadel Journal or English White Dwarf (?) (Anyway, it was a DYK about their Stegadon tour-bus going on a rampage in Nuln and probably from a BBM).
Tilea
The Pergamo Pastas appeared in Companion p.53 not Star-player.
hmm you sure? I will need to go dig out my old books to check that one?
Yes, I checked it, again, this time in my copies (and not just my index lists) and it's correct according to my books. Star-player p.53 is the pre-season article for the Chaos All-Stars and mentions no non-NAF team but the Nibblers.
Valkyries
The Vynheim Valkyries are actually the most famous Norse team (e.g. the former Norsca Rampagers), not a Valkyrie team as such, which is a bit of a leap. However, they did, or could have had, female players (see Zena Blackmane transferred to the Valkyries from the Amazon All-Stars in 2500 (BBM1 p.27), marked as the first Amazon (possibly, but not necessarily, same as female?) player to transfer).
yeah i left them out on purpose because they were too famous and have a number of male stars.
I phrased this badly, sorry. My point was the same that you've made. Because the Valkyries team section does list the Vynheim Valkyries under famous teams. And they shouldn't.
Werewolf
I always thought the Icecastle Wolves (Werewolves?) are a Werewolf team, but I may be wrong. Lore of Nuffle has them as Norse, which makes sense as they replace the Wüppertal Wotans based on similarities (which may be race) according to Companion p.48. Still, it's a
I believe Icecastle wolves are Norse, I would need to go away and double check though.
I shouldn't have mention this, as Lore of Nuffle is probably correct (i.e. they are Norse). However, the point can be debated. As that is never mentioned as a fact (as far as I know) other than the strong suggestion on (C p.48).
All mentions of the Icecastle Wolves, I'm aware of: 2nd HB p.27 & 35, SP p.26, C p.48.
And the Icecastle Werewolves (probably an error on GW part, as they never were particularly on top of the background (save the time from 1986 to 89 when Gascoigne was editor, coincidence, I think not)): BBM 12 p.31.
My main argument against “Norse being their race” is that the Icecastle Wolves are a famous team at the time of the Star-player book (AFC in 2488) but are not listed under famous Norse team (SP p.32) and that is highly unusual (omitted, on purpose or forgotten?)*, as any other AFC/NFC team is listed without fail. However, neither are they mentioned as a famous Werewolf team (SP p.34), but then again the Werewolf section has no famous team section (...). So, personally, I have a question mark behind their race, as there is no actual conformation for it, as far as I know (WDs from 1988 may contradict me, though).
Anyway, Norse is probably correct, because of the “similarity” angle. Then again that similarity could be “racial/social/geographic” and if you care to you could argue that they are a “Norse” team, from the same region, but with an unusual number of “Werebears” , and thus qualify as both.
This is an excerpt from my document on how to deal with inconsistencies creatively: “...rather than just calling this (Icecastle Werewolves) a typo (or different team) this could be a nice opportunity to make them a mixed team (Norse and Werecreatures like bears or wolves?) and have the altering name reflect that (i.e. they are the Icecastle Werewolves, short Wolves (on any other day but a full moon). Especially, for those places that feel uncomfortable about werecreatures. (Note: In BB Werecreatures are often victims of discrimination and restraining laws**. To combat the wide-spread prejudice, witch-hunt, burning at the stake and revenge by bereft relatives (or farmers who lost their live-stock/chickens) the Wolves' management regularly adjust the team's name for marketing reasons. (While at the same time try to raise awareness (for their problem)), As perhaps seen in the (“We're are just bearded men!” or “A wolf can shave!” campaign).”
Other than that there is an interesting option to have the team being successful in the past (Chaos Cup wins in the 40s (BBM 12/31)***), then destroyed by Morg (70s) (2nd HB p.35****), until they reformed and entered the league again (84) (C p.48) on the basis of being men (among much controversy).”
This is just an example how stories can be spun simply by taking all “facts” and make them work together (even though they are a contradicting mess). I'm not a particularly good writer, and the above is more a collection of points that need a better build up and some polishing. But what intrigues me is that by simply aligning all the facts it is possible to construct rather in-depth team backgrounds, which, at the same time, fix background-errors (eureka!).
And the BB background has an abundance of small facts like that. It's just a pity that GW could never be made to care about it.
*Bluchen Berserkers are not listed, too. However, I'm not sure on their race either. Could be Norse, Human or Chaos/Khorne? Judging by SP not listing them I would say possibly “Chaos/Khorne”?
**Erik 'the dog' Jorgsen indicent (2nd RB p.10)
***Note that CRP removed these, well, actually only 2 of the 3 (?). However, as I point out below I don't agree with revisionism. I rather spin it into a new story, to smooth it out again.
****This is a possible error, as later (C. p.48), it has been established that they joined the league in 84, which means Morg played this game in 73 against a non-NAF team, which is possible, but odd. Fixing it this way, however, gives Morg another background titbit (forced a team to disband: DYK box) and the BBM 12/31 championships can be explained, too.
Witch Elf
The Deadly Nightshades are a Vampire team (see Lhamia team or BBM4 p.5) (i.e. CRP was either at fault with this one or decided to rewrite it).
CRP decided to re-write this, I also pointed this out, however I felt it fine to site both sources
Yeah, I really don't agree with what CRP did there. This is GW policy of “updating & modernizing” and it's just not good. It does nothing but destabilize the background. If they wanted a Witch-Elf team they just should have created a new one. Now the background contradicts itself, for no good reason.
Simply not good. And a reason why I would prefer to keep CRP optional, otherwise it's another publication I have to wrap my head around. Although I think the integrity of the BB background is mostly shattered at this point anyway, especially as the owner doesn't care.
However, the only other case were CRP was disrespectful was in regard to Lizardman, as GW removed Slann and CRP repaid that in kind by ignoring GW's stuff on Lizardman. :roll eyes:. Which is just bad. And not even necessary. With a bit of time, inspiration, creativity and knowing all the facts it is possible to amalgamate all versions of the background, without any need to ever “ignore”, “rewrite”, “update” or “modernize” anything. However, mention that to GW and show them proof of concept and they'll tell you to “stop beating a dead horse” and “that has passed, move on...”. :throws up hands in despair:
It's really frustrating.
I wrote 800 KB of documents & spread-sheets, categorizing and sorting the entire background to make controlling the background a possibility. As the initial workload is the major downside of such an attempt, but I thought if I put in the time and work (took 5 years, from 2010 to 2015), it can be done. (This is also the reason why I can proofread your fluff fairly easily and throw around page numbers off the cuff, as I have everything handily on file; page numbers, dates, stats, championships, historic events, whatever. Only needs ctrl+f and some knowledge on how to navigate my system). I then also wrote fluff as proof of concept how “contradictions” or “updating material” could be solved or done without creating conflicts. However, GW decided they know better, ignored it and ran it into the ground instead.
There is just no helping some people.
And then there is a longer list of typos and cosmetics, which you may or may not want to correct. The full list is in the following word document: http://www.filedropper.com/proofread
thank you for the typo document. I have corrected what I had missed
I'm surprised it's still up, I thought filezipper would erase all my crap after one month without download (…)?