The Ogre Spike! and NAF tournaments

[Danny]

They are rostered inducements, not inducements generated during the inducement phase of a progression game.

That makes no sense mate, there is no mechanism in Blood Bowl to roster inducements (dz2 star player rostering aside). For a chef, bribes, and star players to be used there has to be a pseudo inducement phase. So why is this any different?

[Wifflebat]

That makes no sense mate, there is no mechanism in Blood Bowl to roster inducements (dz2 star player rostering aside). For a chef, bribes, and star players to be used there has to be a pseudo inducement phase. So why is this any different?

Well, tournaments that I've been to have had rules in the pack something like this:

You may purchase any other inducements for your team, including Star Players...

Which is a specific tournament rule allowing it. I think I would look favorably upon a sentence in this section of any rules pack that reads, "in addition to their tournament treasury, coaches may also spend on inducements only a number of GP equal to the purchase value of any and all players on their team who have the Disposable skill."

Otherwise, they can make explicit an inducement phase somewhere in the rules. It's pretty clear to me that the only "ruling" the NAF is making is that there is not necessarily such a phase in a resurrection tournament.

[Shadowwarl]

Ok stupid question time from a non NAF TO.
Over the past 5 or 6 tournaments I have ran I have never looked at or included on the rosters I have provided for the tournaments a spot for team value just cost spent on team and cost spent on inducements and total of the two.

Question 1. Does the NAF require on the tournament roster the team value to be listed as well as the team cost or just total cost?

Question 2. If just total cost then what is the problem with disposable because you have to pay the cost of the gobnar as part of the team cost anyway?

From my point of view the Team Cost with inducements is whats important while Team Value has no effect on a tournament game.

Am I correct or incorrect I would really appreciate your responses.

Thank you.

[Purplegoo]

I think I understand those questions, but apologies if not and I don’t answer them correctly. The NAF doesn’t mind how much gold you give out to build teams, so long as your tournament satisfies the Tournament Approval Doc. Disposable doesn’t come into it, because of the logic you use at the bottom of your post, as myself and others have said above.

And Leap, I think it does make sense. This is a skill that doesn’t apply, not an inducement you can roster as is standard for the format. That some have a different interpretation is the (good) reason we made this clarification.

[Bakunin]

The op seems less clear the more I read it.

Can you as a TO include disposable or not?
Seems multiple TOs want too, and have declared they are gonna do it.

[lunchmoney]

Include it or not, it makes no difference in a resurrection tourney.

[Danny]

So a TO can include something like “for every player with the Disposable skill, you have additional GP of the value of that player to spend”?

[Purplegoo]

You are likely sailing pretty close to changing a skill description at that point (if not literally, at least in intent), I guess. It is trivial to achieve the same thing by just giving them the standard Ogre roster amount of extra money in your system, or whatever. Most people seem to have got onboard with this pretty immediately, but if you aren’t, it isn’t difficult to create the effect you want.

I appreciate we’re all passionate about the game and it is impossible for the NAF to make a call on anything everyone agrees with. We’re doing our best, and all that. I am as up for Ogres getting extra stuff to play with as anyone else, we’re simply looking to keep everyone on the same page. Looking forward to what’s next from our GW friends.

[Danny]

You are likely sailing pretty close to changing a skill description at that point (if not literally, at least in intent), I guess. It is trivial to achieve the same thing by just giving them the standard Ogre roster amount of extra money in your system, or whatever. Most people seem to have got onboard with this pretty immediately, but if you aren’t, it isn’t difficult to create the effect you want.

I appreciate we’re all passionate about the game and it is impossible for the NAF to make a call on anything everyone agrees with. We’re doing our best, and all that. I am as up for Ogres getting extra stuff to play with as anyone else, we’re simply looking to keep everyone on the same page. Looking forward to what’s next from our GW friends.

You can’t please everyone but if you’re allowing each TO to choose to use the skill how they see it (even with workarounds) then people can vote with their feet if they don’t like it. I personally think the spirit of the GW rules means they shouldn’t count towards GP and would be keen to allow players to take advantage of this with extra gold if that’s the way to achieve this if the NAF is saying there is no kind of inducement phase (although I still don’t get this!)

[Bakunin]

Is just seems like a bad solution, to say ogres get a free reroll or hairyfeet for free to give them what they should get by gw design. This will come off as weird tiering. Just easier and straight forward to play by the rules

[Skitters]

Could a TO allow disposable players to be purchased on a Buy one get one free basis and not have the free players count towards the 16 player limit?

This would save having to introduce an inducement round before tournament games

Would probably need a note that BOGOF players do not come with any extra skills

[Purplegoo]

I've often said that TD should be renamed 'Top Dull Rules Pedant Guy', and this thread is going to add to my argument.

I suspect, Skitters, that you've used a form of words there that would fall foul of changing a skill description or a fundamental BB cost / stat (effectively making Gnoblars 10 k, so changing their price). Last Friday, before Disposable, TOs could give Ogres ~150 k more gold to build their team with than Goblins or Halflings with our blessing (you can help lesser races so long as you don't go too far and change the natural order of things so Ogres > Woodies). That is still true now, and if you like the impact Disposable has on your league Ogre team, I would go as far as to recommend / encourage that sort of thing. It's simple, clean, and doesn't change the skill description as the majority see it. Bish, bash, bosh.

Bakunin, absolutely, it is easier and more straight forward to play by the rules; that is the NAF way wherever we can help it. I appreciate that you have a different interpretation of Disposable to the majority, but I don't think you're going to find satisfaction here by you and I going around in circles indefinitely. As you know, we have an Annual Review process. Please feel free to petition your NTO, have him bring it up next year and we can debate it. Ultimately, of course, you have the power to act and attempt to democratically get change on this or anything else. The next TD election, for example, is in Jan 2021 (although, allowing TOs to change skill descriptions is probably a wider committee thing, and above my personal pay grade, much as I'd have strong input).

[Wifflebat]

So, wait. Are you saying that you would be opposed to a tournament rule that reads something like this:

"Coaches get XXX gold for buying players, rerolls, and inducements. Additionally, if a team includes players with the Disposable skill, that team's coach will receive additional gold equal to the purchase price of those players."

It doesn't change the skill; coaches don't at any point use a version of the skill, but it's referenced in the tournament rules pack in a clear way. It's not changing player pricing; it's just setting up a metric for how teams (only Ogres right now, but possibly others in the future) are given additional gold. It might require a tiering adjustment for Ogres in general, but that will all come out in the was once we see how much of a difference it actually makes.

[montanhas18]

If you're going to start compensating teams for "skills meant for Leagues that aren't represented in tournament team building structures"... do we need an exception for Weeping Dagger as well? Decay? I'm not sure about Nurgle's Rot...

Come on...

[Purplegoo]

Hello Wifflebat,

I think that if you can read Disposable and convince yourself it works at a resurrection tournament (as some clearly can), you can certainly read your quotation there and see those as 0 k Gnoblars or a clever attempt to change the Disposable skill description to fit the format. While the sanction doc. could never hope to have a rule for every situation that arises, the catch-all attempts to subvert any of these requirements through unforeseen means may result in the refusal of sanction is probably appropriate here. It's certainly above and beyond the standard sort of this is a Warpstone stadium tournament, Skaven and Underworld get +1 FF' racial buffs we usually OK.

Can I spin the question around? What is unpalatable about offering Ogres x k more gold or giving them free inducements (each of which is already common) if you think that appropriate, rather than trying to wrangle some form words that passes muster and stealth tweak a skill description that doesn't apply to the format so it will fly? It seems more elegant to me, and is certainly less of a headache.

I don't really enjoy being the fun police, I doubt anyone does. This might all seem excessively tedious and beardy to some of you ('live and let live, get people get on with it, you busybody!'), but in a greater good way, it is worthwhile. If I didn't think that, I wouldn't still be writing these posts.