Slann Amendments

Got a great idea and/or proposal for BloodBowl?

Moderator: TFF Mods

adhansa
Experienced
Experienced
Posts: 151
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:44 am

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by adhansa »

I might have missed some discussion, but i don´t understand what needs amending. Is it that the stats of the Blitzer make it unwise to take all 4?

They are a wierd team, but thats from all the way from 2nd ed. And it's from that edition that all the 3 new teams are translated as directly as possible (right?).

What is the problem with Slann in your opinion. To low win ratio? To expensive players? To wierd skills? No natural standardblitzer?

Reason: ''
User avatar
Iranian Spy
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 9:31 pm

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by Iranian Spy »

Skills are fine - I like the character. Catchers seem effective despite the lack of any defensive skills, STR2 and AV7; linemen fit the fluff; Krox is a nice addition.

My main issue is the Blitzer. He's far too pricey for what he does and his role isn't really defined. With both AG and ST access I feel like he can be anything you want but you're going to pay through the nose to keep them and are unlikely to have 4 unless you cut something else to keep your overall TV low. I would like a more defined role for something more costworthy and actually usable alongside the rest of the team even if it means their numbers need lowering, though 4 would be nice if they acted more like human blitzers (albeit with leap). To choose catchers OR blitzers seems out of character for any team unless they're being done for comedy value.

Reason: ''
User avatar
spubbbba
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2267
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: York

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by spubbbba »

We really don’t need any more players starting with the same boring skills (block, dodge, pass, catch etc) as everyone else.

Frankly it is the only way some skills will ever be taken as there are loads of better normal ones to take, or stats/doubles get in the way.

That being said the skills need to be priced accordingly, a player starting with blodge is worth far more than one with NoS, Diving Catch and Grab. So I’d prefer the price of players be reduced.

Reason: ''
My past and current modelling projects showcased on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.
dines
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 1:59 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by dines »

Think I'd vote for Garion or Ink's ideas. Garion's would improve the team the most, but Ink's might be more fun. Giving them block would be boring.

Reason: ''
FUMBBL nick: Metalsvinet
Calcium
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:59 pm
Location: Dorset

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by Calcium »

I personally started off hating Slann with a passion, I just couldn't buy their fluff, and mass (any skill) is a bit of a sore point with me as well.....

However, having played against them more and more (Still can't bring myself to play with them!) I realise they are quite good fun to compete against. Of course mass leap is bloody annoying when the dice are good, but that's the case with any team, so I got that outta my system. Certainly a team with flaws, but in retrospect thats exactly what BB needs, unbalanced teams to enhance the quality of the game overall :)

*Just need to think of a cool name for my 1st froggie team ;)

Reason: ''
User avatar
Corvidius
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 573
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by Corvidius »

Was just thinking about the Blitzers with the mention of skill access. The Slann Blitzers pay a higher cost up front but get an overall tax break because the only double skills for them are passing so they don't suffer from doubles tax.

A Slann Blitzer legend could be a Block, Dodge, Piling On, Mighty Blow, Tackle, Sidestep, Jump Up, Diving Tackle, Leap, Very Long Legs, 7 3 3 8 for what, 230k?

A human blitzer simply can't compete in terms of number of skills or versatility. Sure, he's no Wardancer but I think his value in terms of long term development might well justify the cost. Don't get me wrong, i'd be fine with a price drop but now that I look at the costs it does make me think about how best to use them.

Reason: ''
User avatar
Were_M_Eye
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by Were_M_Eye »

I think the krox needs leap too. Then everyone in the team would have it.

Reason: ''
Gaixo
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1278
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:18 pm
Location: VA

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by Gaixo »

I pitched that idea ages ago! I think you'd have to give him VLL as well. Call him a bull slann or whatever. The risk/reward aspect of an AG2-equivalent ST5 player with leap would lead to a lot of fun situations, I think.

Reason: ''
Image
User avatar
Heff
Dwarf fetishist
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:53 pm
Location: Where the Dwarf Hate is

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by Heff »

How about making sure feet allow a leap re roll? like dodge but cancelled by tackle?

Reason: ''
Heff...Keeping the Dwarf (and lego) hate alive
If you cannot stall out for an 8 turn drive to score with dwarves then you need to go and play canasta with your dad..if you can find him.
Image
SlannMann
Experienced
Experienced
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:23 am

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by SlannMann »

What with J-Bone's amazing Frogman team on Indiegogo atm I wanted to post on this topic. The real amendments I would love to see involve their Star Players (which would also end up benefiting the Lizardmen). Hemlock and Morg would stay untouched, the other Stars I amended as how I'd like to see them using the following rules on an edition of Three Die Block (01.14.2013) - Team creation w/ Tom Anders:

Take the closest normal player you can find to the Star (EG. Jordell Freshbreeze is a Wardancer built into a Star Player version of that position but with Loner. Loner reduces the final calculated price by 20k)
Add 20k for every extra skill they get. For attributes use the SPP table plus 10k, so +1 strength would cost 60k (50 + 10 = 60). Any skill that position would not normally have access to treat as a double roll, so 30k for a Blocker positional to have an agility skill.
For a Big Guy Star Player without a negative trait, price him up based on a Saurus starting template (6419 No starting skills, 80k)

1) Silbli.
Stats stay the same but he gains Horns and Thick Skull as additional skills. If anyone should have the Horns and Thick Skull skills it would be a player wearing a horned dinosaur skull for a helmet! Price stays at 250k for team balance even though he comes in at 230k following the rules above. Really disliked his original name Silibili, his current one is slightly better tho still not much of a fan. I refer to him as Grimbloq (Your chances look grim when being blocked by this bad ass Saurus).

Grimbloq
7419 Loner, Block, Grab, Guard, Horns, Stand Firm, Thick Skull - 250k

Breakdown:
80k (Saurus Starting Base 6419)
40k MV 7
20k Block, 20k Grab, 20k Guard, 30k Horns, 20k Stand Firm, 20k Thick Skull
-20k Loner
230k Total calculated price (Although stays at the current 250k)

2) Lottabottol.
In 4th Ed he was a linefrog, not a blitzer, with AG 4, Catch, Pass Block and Pro which seems appropriate to me for a player who earned the nickname 'The Leaper' due to his record number of interceptions. I imagine him to be nearer his 4th Ed incarnation than his current one and it would also see him acutally being induced. So my Lottabottol is a linefrog with +1 MV and AG with skills Catch and Pass Block (all adds up to his record number of intercepts background due to his speed, agility and skills). I was thinking why not make him an all round ball sacker rather than just an airborne one as it were. So I give him the skills of Strip Ball and Wrestle (he has a lot of bottle as he will hunt down the ball no matter how big or bad of an opponent the ball carrier is).

7348 Loner, Catch, Leap, Pass Block, Strip Ball, V L Legs, Wrestle - 220k

Breakdown:
60k (Linefrog Starting Base 6338 Leap, Very Long Legs)
40k MV 7
50k AG 4
30k Catch, 20k Pass Block, 20k Strip Ball, 20k Wrestle
-20k Loner
220k Total calculated price

Reason: ''
SlannMann
Experienced
Experienced
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:23 am

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by SlannMann »

3) Quetzal-Leap.
4th Ed he was 8257 with Catch, Diving Catch, Dodge, Leap, NoS, Pro, V L Legs. I would like a bit of a mix of both 4th Ed and 6th Ed rules. So stats wise he gains +1 AG like in 4th Ed which would help him to fulfill the background statement that he "seemed to be able to take the ball wherever it was thrown". Skill wise he has 6th Ed skills, although swapping Fend for Dodge (even tho I do like Fend for a Slann catcher skill).

7257 Loner, Catch, Diving Catch, Dodge, Kick off Return, Leap, Nerves of Steel, V L Legs - 200k

Breakdown:
80k (Catcher Starting Base 7247 Diving Catch, Leap, Very Long Legs)
50k AG 5
20k Catch, 20k Dodge, 20k Kick off Return, 30k Nerves of Steel
-20k Loner
200k Total calculated price

4) Helmut Wulf.....
I really liked the old Kroxigor Star Player (yes, even his name!) Sokitoomi due his combo of such high movement and strength (fastest of all the Big Guys, whether they be Star Player or not). I also like Pitch Invader's Hurtza Lotle Krox Star Player and totally agree with him that there should be a Krox Star Player represented. So...I would replace Helmut Wulf with a new Star Player Krox called Hurtzalotl (cos it's such a good name!). He would gain +1 MV and ST like the old Sokitoomi plus skills Break Tackle and Juggernaut.
Fluff : A giant of a Kroxigor who combines the Lizardmen's mix of strength and dexterity in one devastating player. Once this killer Krok gets momentum he becomes an unstoppable force on the pitch using his exceptional speed and mass to smash through the opposing team.

Hurtzalotl
7619 Loner, Break Tackle, Juggernaut, Mighty Blow, Prehensile Tail, Thick Skull - 330k

Breakdown:
80k (Saurus Starting Base 6419)
40k MV 7
60k ST 5
60k ST 6
20k B.Tackle, 20k Juggernaut, 20k M.Blow, 30k P.Tail*, 20k T.Skull*
-20k Loner
330k Total calculated price
*Prehensile Tail and Thick Skull cost 10k less than what I have used in my pricing according to the explaination of how the Kroxigor was created in the Three Die Block episode mentioned at the beginning of my post. So my pricing is a bit of a fudge but I think it works out for a better total calculated price. Or if you want to make him more like the original Hurtza Lotle, then replace Break Tackle for Shadowing (which, with a MV 7 Hurtza, makes the skill worth a lot more to the Krox) and add 10k to his cost for a total of 340k.

Alternatively, I always liked the idea of a Kroxigor with Diving Tackle to get a -3 to a players dodge roll so I thought why not put it on my custom Star Krox? So this version of Hurtzalotl is designed to live up to his name sake with his skills, much like Grimbloq and Lottabottol.

Hurtzalotl
7619 Loner, Diving Tackle, Mighty Blow, Pile On, Prehensile Tail, Thick Skull - 340k
Fluff : Unable to pronounce his true name, Hurtzalotl is a nickname given to him by Jim and Bob derrived from the amount of casualties the Kroxigor causes due to it's love of tripping his opponents up with his tail before using his massive bulk to crush them into the astrogranite. The nickname stuck due to it's simplicity for even the most simple minded fans to pronounce!

Reason: ''
babass
Super Star
Super Star
Posts: 779
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2013 4:05 pm

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by babass »

We may have to create a dedicated own-bigguy profile to the Slann roster.
A "froxigor", instead of a Kroxigor.

No tails (as frog don't have tails), ThickSkull do not fit as well to frog.
But leaping.



Why not something like:
5 5 2 9 loner, mighty blow, very long legs, leap, regen, Bone Head


and maybe another "passive/defensiv" skill, like shadowing or diving tackle.

Reason: ''
Image
fromherashes
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 6:51 pm
Location: Aberdeen

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by fromherashes »

babass wrote:We may have to create a dedicated own-bigguy profile to the Slann roster.
A "froxigor", instead of a Kroxigor.

No tails (as frog don't have tails), ThickSkull do not fit as well to frog.
But leaping.



Why not something like:
5 5 2 9 loner, mighty blow, very long legs, leap, regen, Bone Head


and maybe another "passive/defensiv" skill, like shadowing or diving tackle.
I thought the name Croaxigor was already widely used?

With regard to the "tail" I've always assumed you'd use a prehensile tongue instead.

Don't really agree with the other amendments either as the big guy is more likely to be a toad and they walk/squirm and don't leap like frogs.

Reason: ''
User avatar
Pedda
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 687
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:39 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by Pedda »

I don't usually play with blitzers because they're too expensive and I'd therefore reduce their cost to 90k and remove the strength access.
It seems weird to me that they have S skills, since it doesn't seem to fit the slanns style of blood bowl.

I'd also change the name to something else than blitzers, as their roll wouldn't be that of a normal blitzer.
Maybe adding wrestle and calling them sackers for 100k.

Reason: ''
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: Slann Amendments

Post by plasmoid »

Whoa. This isn't just a Slann thread. It's a necro thread :o

But anyway, I've previously suggested that in the conversion of 2nd ed. Slann to 3rd ed. Slann, the Diving Tackle is kind of a strange add-on.
Yes, it is "diving", so you could say it had to do with leaping - but nothing in the 2nd ed. slann skill-set corresponds to it.
I like the flavour, and I always like to see less popular skills get their day in the limelight. But DT may well be part of the reason that the Blitzers seem so harshly priced.

Cheers
Martin

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
Post Reply