Fouling Rules for house league -- what do you think?

[mattgslater]

I want fouling to be harsher and more brutal on both sides than it is in LRB5, in a set of rules that otherwise is pretty LRB5-derived. 10-game fixed season followed by bowl game and tournament, 6-8 teams. I want to see more fouling than I'm seeing in 5th, but less than in 3rd and with a less clear-cut impact than in 4th. I have players complaining that there's not enough Blood in the Bowl, and are used to more winnings, more player turnover and faster player development than in the current rules.

1) Whenever a player commits a foul, if that player is not in an enemy tackle zone, he may add +1 to the armor roll.

2) Dirty Player gives +1 to both rolls (MB too, but not on a foul; this is so MB competes with Guard a little better as a doubles result).

3) Casualties from a foul, stab or secret weapon are worth SPP.

4) If the armor or injury roll from a foul is a double, or if an injury roll from a stab is a double, the referee spots the foul/stab. Rather than ejecting the player, the referee, who carries a big weapon like a sword or axe to defend himself from rampaging Blood Bowl players, is allowed to take a swing at the player! The opposing (victim) team's coach rolls 1d6: on a 2+, the ref hits the fouler/stabber and scores an automatic casualty. Roll on the casualty table. On a 1, the ref misses and may not swing again.

An accompanying rules change would be a price increase on Skeletons (40k) and a couple of other changes, like making the Apothecary better and improving the Necromancer a bit. Regenerating teams will have an advantage fouling, but I think the price bump should keep it from becoming too too much. Also, there will be more money flowing around than there is in 5th as written, so a small increase in the body count isn't really a bad thing.

If you think these fouling rules will make the game more than (or other than) a little more bloody and a little faster-developing, let me know. I'd rather work out as many kinks as possible before testing it in a season.

[MadLordAnarchy]

1) Yup
2) Yup
3) Yup bar weapon
4) Yup to concept - I added Retributive tomy list of referee demeanours ahead of this season

Closer to 3ed fouling I guess (not knowing what the current fouling rules are).

Risk/reward is key for fouling in my view. Adding greater reward to fouling should also bring greater risk - I do that with Refs On The Pitch which has worked extremely well for us these 4 and a half years - more likely to be sent off but we retain the somewhat bloody fouling rules.

[Joemanji]

Not my cup of tea at all. We've finally got away from the DP arms race, so to me this all seems like a retrograde step.

SPPs for fouls sets off particular alarm bells. I remember in 3rd when a team's DP had more SPPs than the rest of his team combined.

[Pil]

3) Yup bar weapon

I think SPPs for waepon casulaties are ok, a chainsaw goblin has no way to earn SPPs other than for receiving MVP's, since he's not allowed to block (has to use the chainsaw instead) and has no hands, so SPPs will make them a bit better.

These rules will indeed add a lot more blood to the bowl, and they will favour bash teams too, but if that's what the people want, I say give it to them!

[Kyrel]

1) OK
2) OK
3) OK
4) Don't like this one. Partially because I don't really see a ref running around with a weapon, and partially because I don't like the thought of a player being killed by a ref. And from the pure fluff pow. Do you think a ref would survive killing a crowd favourite for doing something that the spectators love to see? Said ref would be hunted down and slain in a most unpleasant manner by irate fans!
I've another suggestion for you though. On a double, the fouling player is thrown out of the match. ADDITIONALLY, roll a D6 for the fouling player. On a roll of 4+, the foul is exceptionally rough, and the player is banned from participating in the next game as well. Fouling thus would have a 1/12 chance of getting a player thrown out of both the rest of the game as well as the next one. That ought to be harsh enough.

[mattgslater]

SPPs for fouls sets off particular alarm bells. I remember in 3rd when a team's DP had more SPPs than the rest of his team combined.

Yeah, I agree that that was a problem, though that might be a bit of an exaggeration (I was the foulinest of foulin' coaches back then, and my DP was usually around #2-3 on the team in terms of SPP, as other guys would get foul points too). I think that it was right in editions after 3rd to disincentivize fouling. The Ref with an Axe rule and the 5th-edition realities of fouling (more likely to get caught than to get a Cas) are intended to keep a lid on that; do I need something more?

Here's why I wanted to give SPPs for fouling.
1) The 3rd-ed. mentality of a couple of my coaches can't handle it any other way.
2) Without fouling SPP, there's no way to make an effort to bump up a slow player who's one or two away without taking a really big risk.
3) Fouling is risky and crowd-pleasing, so it makes sense given what SPP are for that fouls would be worth points.
4) I think the game has gotten too soft and needs to be a bit more violent (though not like the old days). I'd like to see a situation where some teams foul a little and some foul a lot, but where fouling is generally not advantageous in the individual match unless applied very selectively.

[Wosret]

Interesting rules

We use only slightly modified version of the official rules (LRB5.0)
Cas from Foul is worth spp but RK must miss next game aswell as being ejected.