Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contribute

For Fantasy Football related chat that doesn't come under any of other forum categories.

Moderator: TFF Mods

Post Reply
Steam Ball
Super Star
Super Star
Posts: 977
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 6:21 pm

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by Steam Ball »

VoodooMike wrote:
Steam Ball wrote:And it raises a serious point: hard to trust when things are spread all over the place, with the weirdest names. Is that link real, or a trap?
If it's linked to from the official site then it's probably safe to say that it's real. Similarly, there's not much trap to be had when the link goes directly to a basic data file like PDF.
But it is linked here, so looking here alone we don't know. On itself it looks like random crap. That's what lunchmonkey reaction demostrated, for him that was not from GW, but suspicious. A crafted PDF can cause serious damage, the programs handling them don't have a good record about security. It's the whole point of "not clicking suspicious links" everyone should learn (yet tech companies force to un-learn, as demostrated).

They could use something like cdnXXXXX.games-workshop.com as front facing names, even if still someone else servers in background. Or www games-workshop.com, it's also doable (and done, plenty of other examples).

Reason: ''
stashman
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:12 am

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by stashman »

When re-drafting you can buy FF. But how much? Or is it capped to a maximum of 9?

Reason: ''
User avatar
Milo
Super Star
Super Star
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Contact:

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by Milo »

Given no explicit answer, it just says "as you could when buying your team", so I believe the cap of 9 still stands.

I think that's a good compromise -- you can "buy" FF, but you can't max it out without winning games. I would assume buying FF involves advertising campaigns, giveaways, special events to lure fans in, etc. Or maybe just buying a truckload of snotlings and forcing them to cheer for you.

Reason: ''
Milo


Image
stashman
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:12 am

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by stashman »

Milo wrote:Given no explicit answer, it just says "as you could when buying your team", so I believe the cap of 9 still stands.

I think that's a good compromise -- you can "buy" FF, but you can't max it out without winning games. I would assume buying FF involves advertising campaigns, giveaways, special events to lure fans in, etc. Or maybe just buying a truckload of snotlings and forcing them to cheer for you.
Was thinking of load up to 18 just for fun :-)

Reason: ''
User avatar
sann0638
Kommissar Enthusiasmoff
Posts: 6609
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:24 am
Location: Swindon, England

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by sann0638 »

Nice idea. Auto +2 Fame from the beginning, could win you the game, and probably be worth at least one reroll!

Reason: ''
NAF Ex-President
Founder of SAWBBL, Swindon and Wiltshire's BB League - find us on Facebook and Discord
NAF Data wrangler
CyberedElf
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 12:52 am

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by CyberedElf »

From the new FAQ last page question about redrafting: "a brand new team that a) just happens to share a name with your previous season’s team, b) has the same Fan Factor as your previous season’s team"

After redraft you have the same FF, implying you can not buy more to change it.

Reason: ''
Image
User avatar
Shteve0
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 10:15 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by Shteve0 »

So, still no answer on whether the placing of a player prone is conditional on a successful loner roll for big guys in the use of piling on.

Babs, did Andy answer that directly to you?

Reason: ''
League and tournament hosting, blogging and individual forums - all totally free. For the most immersive tabletop sports community experience around, check out theendzone.co
User avatar
JT-Y
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1340
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:53 pm
Location: Chorley, where the police tazer blind people rather than look for the actual sword wielding lunatic
Contact:

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by JT-Y »

I can answer that.
If you fail Loner you don't Pile On so aren't placed prone.

Reason: ''

"It´s better to enlarge the game than to restrict the players." -- Erick Wujcik
stashman
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1611
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:12 am

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by stashman »

CyberedElf wrote:From the new FAQ last page question about redrafting: "a brand new team that a) just happens to share a name with your previous season’s team, b) has the same Fan Factor as your previous season’s team"

After redraft you have the same FF, implying you can not buy more to change it.
But under Re-Drafting wording is (... Fan Factor carries over....)

If you wish to increase it, you can do so at a cost of 10,000 gp per point of Fan Factor.

Maybe you don't have the DZ Season One! Book

Reason: ''
Babs
Super Star
Super Star
Posts: 766
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 9:06 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by Babs »

Shteve0 wrote:So, still no answer on whether the placing of a player prone is conditional on a successful loner roll for big guys in the use of piling on.

Babs, did Andy answer that directly to you?

No - but since the use of the re-roll is not tied directly to the player (it 'costs' but does not require a roll in and of itself), I would think not. YMMV, however. Worth clarifying perhaps.

Reason: ''
=-) Babs (crotchety old, washed up has-been)
ex-BBRC member
ex-NAF AUS/NZ Tournament organiser


Make sure you have read the Feudball Novel.
User avatar
Milo
Super Star
Super Star
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Contact:

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by Milo »

Babs wrote:
Shteve0 wrote:So, still no answer on whether the placing of a player prone is conditional on a successful loner roll for big guys in the use of piling on.

Babs, did Andy answer that directly to you?

No - but since the use of the re-roll is not tied directly to the player (it 'costs' but does not require a roll in and of itself), I would think not. YMMV, however. Worth clarifying perhaps.
I can confirm what JT-Y stated above: if the Big Guy fails the Loner roll, they cannot use the Team Re-Roll and hence do not go prone.

The full new wording is (errata in italics):

"The player may use this skill after they have made a block as part of a Block or Blitz action, but only if they are currently standing adjacent to the victim and the victim was Knocked Down. You can use a team re-roll to re-roll the Armour roll or Injury roll; if the blocking player has the Loner skill, they must roll as normal to see whether they can use the re-roll. Then the Piling On player is Placed Prone in their own square - no Armour roll is made for them. Piling On does not cause a turnover unless the Piling On player is carrying the ball. Piling On cannot be used with the Stab or Chainsaw skills."

Read it like an "If-Then" programming statement: IF the player uses a team re-roll, THEN they are Placed Prone. If you cannot use the Team Re-Roll due to Loner, then you do not have to go prone.

This was a specific point discussed and decided upon -- it would be piling on, pun intended, if we forced Big Guys to go prone and then they couldn't even use the skill. As it is, if you have the re-rolls to spare, a coach may still use the Piling On skill strategically, but not discriminately (limited to once per turn, costs a resource). Big Guys, who typically have skills that could make Piling On more effective (Claw, MB, etc.), would be a good strategic use of the skill -- if Loner didn't totally bone them.

Reason: ''
Milo


Image
User avatar
GalakStarscraper
Godfather of Blood Bowl
Posts: 15882
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Indiana, USA
Contact:

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by GalakStarscraper »

Still think it was one of the worst possible revisions to the skill that could have been selected when so many much better ones were available. Really poor choice.

Reason: ''
Impact! - Fantasy Football miniatures and supplies designed by gamers for gamers
Image
User avatar
lunchmoney
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8859
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: The Dark Future

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by lunchmoney »

Idiot question - usually if a Loner fails his roll the TRR is still expended. The post above suggests this doesnt happen as far as PO is concerned. Is it?


Why didnt they just limit this one use per turn?

Reason: ''
Hired Goon for the NAF (rep for South West England)
Image
lunchmoneybb@gmail.com

TOs! You do not need multiple copies of rosters. It's a waste of paper.
Bribe level: good coffee.
#FlingNation find me on page 95
User avatar
Milo
Super Star
Super Star
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Contact:

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by Milo »

lunchmoney wrote:Idiot question - usually if a Loner fails his roll the TRR is still expended. The post above suggests this doesnt happen as far as PO is concerned. Is it?

Why didnt they just limit this one use per turn?
I don't see the suggestion you're referencing that Piling On vs. Loner wouldn't expend a re-roll.

Piling On states: "If the blocking player has the Loner skill, they must roll as normal to see whether they can use the re-roll."
Loner states: "On a roll of 1-3, the original result stands without being re-rolled but the team re-roll is lost."
My post said: "If the player uses a re-roll, then they are Placed Prone."

If that's unclear, and you can explain where your confusion is coming from, I'll take it back to the team and see if they can clarify it further.

I'm not going to get into the why of making it use a team re-roll, but I will say "once per turn" is functionally different than "use a TRR", because TRRs are a finite resource and teams do not usually have 1 per turn.

Reason: ''
Milo


Image
User avatar
lunchmoney
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8859
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: The Dark Future

Re: Questions for a Q&A about the new rules - please contrib

Post by lunchmoney »

Milo wrote:I don't see the suggestion you're referencing that Piling On vs. Loner wouldn't expend a re-roll.
My fail at reading, I'll go away now.

Reason: ''
Hired Goon for the NAF (rep for South West England)
Image
lunchmoneybb@gmail.com

TOs! You do not need multiple copies of rosters. It's a waste of paper.
Bribe level: good coffee.
#FlingNation find me on page 95
Post Reply