Bretonnian roster... What's the deal?

[Fist of Gales]

Locally we call the Ulfs 'Bjornwereners' or 'man-bears'. We don't like the werewolf connection since that only came about because GW made werewolf minis and not ulf/bear/men minis.

No we dont, I have only ever heard you say that locally

Though I do easily like it better than "norse werewolf" that is one of the worst player type names that has ever been in my opinion

TL

[Jimmy Fantastic]

The issue is that every other runner gains only Pass access. Norse runner is the only runner that gains agility access.

Idk man, the best Runner has AG access..... the Gutter Runner

[harvestmouse]

I have no problem with him being a bit different than the other Runners with his lack of P access. BB teams should be MORE diverse, not more similar, in my opinion.

He only needs to be slightly more agile than his brethren to earn the Runner position. And the Dauntless works as he will run right at an opponent instead of around him if need be.

He isn't a Blitzer, despite the similarities, because he should not be the first option to hit someone. That is the Berzerker's job. But, again, the Runner will run over a guy if he has to.

Agility access, to me, just means he is slightly more nimble than the other guys trying out for the team. The extra speed is part of that as well. But he doesn't approach Elf levels of agile so no 4AG to start.

So if we agree that the thrower is a bit redundant, why couldn't he have been replaced by a runner rather than the catcher? The catcher with his A access was never redundant.

In the long run it's better for the team, as now you have 2 P access MA 7 players that are hard to pass up and 2 A access players that skill up well. So utilizing all the positionals. The throwers weren't that useful in lrb4, now with no catchers and faster players they're totally worthless.

[Darkson]

http://www.cowell.org/~andy/min/bb/o-journal.html

[SunDevil]

Locally we call the Ulfs 'Bjornwereners' or 'man-bears'. We don't like the werewolf connection since that only came about because GW made werewolf minis and not ulf/bear/men minis.

No we dont, I have only ever heard you say that locally

Though I do easily like it better than "norse werewolf" that is one of the worst player type names that has ever been in my opinion

TL

I was using the royal 'we'.

Two sundevil posts about norse, and not a single mention of 'Runnr'

I have to pick my battles. But I do think that would add some fun flavor to the positional names without changing any core mechanics.

So if we agree that the thrower is a bit redundant, why couldn't he have been replaced by a runner rather than the catcher? The catcher with his A access was never redundant.

In the long run it's better for the team, as now you have 2 P access MA 7 players that are hard to pass up and 2 A access players that skill up well. So utilizing all the positionals. The throwers weren't that useful in lrb4, now with no catchers and faster players they're totally worthless.

I just don't think the Norse are a throwing team so they need neither Throwers nor Catchers. Doesn't fit the fluff of them living and playing in snowstorms and ice. The Catcher wasn't redundant skill-wise but he was weak-fluff wise. With the Runner, you keep the value of having two AG-access guys while adding the Dauntless to up the theme even more. Why they kept the Thrower I have no idea.

[harvestmouse]

Ok, I don't really have a problem with them removing both, I just have a problem with them muddying the water with the runner positional. Playwise the A access player adds a lot though, so it'd be a shame not to have one.

[Darkson]

Why they kept the Thrower I have no idea.

Read the Oberwald page I linked above - the current Norse roster is a nod towards the first 3rd edition Norse roster.

[harvestmouse]

I did, it's a great reference. However in reality it was a fanbased roster. In hindsight it definitely isn't the right roster.

[Darkson]

Was it fan-based? I thought it was a GW-written article from the Journal (just reprinted in Oberwald)?
Unfortunately it was from one of the Journals I never got, so I can't check who the author was.

[babass]

http://www.cowell.org/~andy/min/bb/o-journal.html

Woof Woof: Skeletons destroyed by this player may not regenerate.
The player is placed in reserves box for the remainder of
the match.

If a Treeman is on the pitch, roll D6 before taking an
action with this player. On a 1, the player moves towards
the Treeman. If the player is adjacent to a Treeman, roll
a D6. On a 1, the player may take no further action that
turn

i do love that skill
we need a "woof woof"-spam roster

[plasmoid]

Hi Harvestmouse, MattDakka and all,
one last comment on the team:

@Harvestmouse:
We've been here before, but in a nutshell I'm not that interested in the "pure core" of original 12 rosters. I Refer exclusively to the current rules, the CRP. Nor am I particularly missing 2nd ed. days - where orcs, humans and Chaos all had the same statlines. I like the increased variety. I like the Norse too. I don't think it's a butchers job, and I don't think that my team design has any way to take that opinion into account. Heck, I can even live with the amazon. Because that's the rules.

The way I see it there are 3 different human blitzers. 3 different human linemen. Because there are in the rules. That's why I think a Bretonnian roster could/should stray from the "human" stats. As Spubbbba just posted above, he thinks that the Bret and Khorne rosters are too ordinary in their statlines. You think they're too outlandish. It's a thin line to walk. Perhaps there is no line to walk. Either way I had to make my choices.

Looking at the original 12, I don't even see this rigid order. The original 12 rosters do plenty of weird shite. 2 linemen on the undead team. 11 non-linemen on the orcs (or is that 15?). Wardancers. Slayers. Linemen with 3 skills on dwarfs. etc, etc. They were just first. To me, what makes each roster interesting is where they ever so slightly break the mold, offering surprising/interesting options over the others. Like the AG4 Gutter Runner on an otherwize AG3 team. So I do acknowledge that there are ground rules, but I also think they should be broken a little.

@MattDakka:
I'm sorry you don't like the team. But it's out of my hands now.
I did consider Animosity on the Blitzers, but I was trying to steer clear of another pitfall - overdescription. I thought 4 skills on the blitzer would be too much. We've also had a lot of animosity on the latest rosters. I don't agree that the high borns would even need Animosity. They may disdain the commoners, but they still play to win.

I must say that I'm much more interested in the fluff of the warhammer World than the particulars of the warhammer army.
I stand by my (and Joemanjis) conviction that it needs to be a team of professional athletes rather than army personel.
That's why I aimed for a feudal team - because Bretonnia is a feudal nation, characterized by more than their army.

My take on it was one of arrogant nobles, their squires and filthy peasant linemen, rather than one of knights and man-at-arms.
To my mind, the Bretonnian team has segregated training, with the commoners getting just rudimentary blocking practice, while the nobles and their serfs practice the more fancy stuff. As stated before, in my team the Bretonnian blitzer is flashy before bashy - even though he starts his career every bit as bashy as the other human blitzers. A touch more so in fact.

Finally - the controversial P access: I get that it moves them away from what an ordinary human blitzer is. And I'm sorry it rubs you the wrong way.
To me, the argument is not genetics or geography (as can be found above in this thread), but one of tradition. The Bretonnian nobles prefer the flashier playstyle, so that's how they develop. Like the difference between High, Dark and Wood Elfs. The good old team blurp for Dark Elfs said that they're well suited for the passing game, but they prefer the running game out of spite. To my mind the Bretonnian nobles prefer the flashy game, letting their serfs do the dirty work.

That's how I see it anyway. But I get why you disagree.
Either way, it's out of my hands now.

Cheers
Martin

[harvestmouse]

*Zons do not work well though, they're out of sync at most TV levels. The 2 cookie cutter rosters were interesting but a failed experiment.

*"As Spubbbba just posted above, he thinks that the Bret and Khorne rosters are too ordinary in their statlines. You think they're too outlandish."

Again you fail to understand or see the nuance. The Khorne roster most definitely should have more outlandish stat lines, and I think the Brets would benefit from a super knight type player. I'd be all for you adding a CW style player. I've never said your statlines are too outlandish. My only complaint was that the linos have AG 2, when no other human has AG 2.

*Looking at the original 12...

Again nuance failure.

*Like the AG4 Gutter Runner on an otherwize AG3 team. So I do acknowledge that there are ground rules, but I also think they should be broken a little.

The gutter replaces catchers, and are their A access player. Maybe all catchers should have been made AG4. Maybe they should be now. If you translate this roster from 2nd Ed, he'd be an AG4.

* "must say that I'm much more interested in the fluff of the warhammer World than the particulars of the warhammer army.
I stand by my (and Joemanjis) conviction that it needs to be a team of professional athletes rather than army personel.
That's why I aimed for a feudal team - because Bretonnia is a feudal nation, characterized by more than their army."

Yeah I don't really get this. To be honest I don't overly care. Your blitzers can be blitzers or knights to my mind, it's not a biggy for me. However you're going for a warhammer nation theme but then saying no, they're a BB nation so pro athletes. I think you need to stick with one or the other. A warhammer nation, like the HE (I don't think they should have be renamed, but no biggy) or a BB team in which case nations cease to exist like warhammer. Certainly in the Old World at least. Borders are pretty meaningless on the whole. Your idea of your theme is a bit muddy, but it works ok so.....

Not quite sure what interest you had in putting more fuel on the fire. I don't see how it aids you at all. You even pointed out that we'd done it to death. But hey ho, pretty sure I tried letting it go a while back.

[GalakStarscraper]

I did, it's a great reference. However in reality it was a fanbased roster. In hindsight it definitely isn't the right roster.

Not a fanbased roster. That roster was published in Citadel Journal by Games Workshop as the official Norse team for 3rd edition (just like official rules were also published in White Dwarf and Fanatic). I used that team to create the rules for the current Norse roster. Thus Dauntless, the Ulfs and the Snow Troll ... I took the team back more to its original 3rd edition roots to get rid of the 6/3/3/7 Block template.

So definitely was not a fanbased roster.

[MattDakka]

Not a fanbased roster. That roster was published in Citadel Journal by Games Workshop as the official Norse team for 3rd edition (just like official rules were also published in White Dwarf and Fanatic). I used that team to create the rules for the current Norse roster. Thus Dauntless, the Ulfs and the Snow Troll ... I took the team back more to its original 3rd edition roots to get rid of the 6/3/3/7 Block template.

So definitely was not a fanbased roster.

A badly designed roster with useless Throwers and Catchers without Catch.

[legowarrior]

That pretty much describes Blood Bowl though, doesn't it?