Negative traits for Vampires

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Fri Oct 18, 2002 3:05 pm

Ok, GW has gone and published the old lord, vampires and thralls vampire team...

As McDeth noted the main problem with the OFAB is still present, mainly that the skill has no effect after you pass the roll.

To reflect the history that vampire teams shouldn't be good, and to reflect the fact that vampires are powerful, the negative trait should effect the players on-pitch instead of off-pitch. There is no other good solution.

In this system, both the vampires (including the lord) and the thralls have a negative trait. The negative traits are as follows:

Me! Me!- skill (all vampires have this)
---------------
If the player is in possession of the ball in the beginning of the team turn, roll a d6. On 1-3 proceed as follows:
-The player declares either a blitz or a move action (coach decides).
-He attempts to move as far towards the opposing end zone as possible
-Every square he moves must move him one square closer to the EZ.
-Coach is not allowed to move him into "traps" that prevent the previous
-He must move his full movement allowance including GFI's
-He can block during his move if he declared a blitz action
-He can use any skills he might have to achieve the goal of getting as far as possible (incl. hypnogaze)

"My massster"-skill (thralls have this)
-----------------
If the player is in possession of the ball in the beginning of the team turn and there is a Me! Me!-player within the players MA from the player, roll a d6. On 1-3 proceed as follows:
-The player makes a Hand-off action, moves next to the closest Me!Me! player and hands off the ball to him.

With these rules, the ST4AG4 players shouldn't be a problem. The team isn't going to do very well as their vampires aim for personal glory and thralls are too terrified of their masters to keep the ball.

The skills are really rather simple, and are, IMO, superior to the old OFAB skill.

Tell me what you think.

Corlus · Post by **Corlus** » Fri Oct 18, 2002 3:43 pm

Mestari:

I like those ideas, but how many coaches are going to want that many tactical descisions taken out of their hands?

DaFrenchCoach · Post by **DaFrenchCoach** » Fri Oct 18, 2002 3:50 pm

Sounds interesting, but I think it's a little bit complicated... What should be made IMO:

- removing a point of ST to Vampires (not the vampire lord)
OR
- making something like it has been made with the 1st edition o Albion Wanderers: I can't remember the exact translation, but it sounds like a feodal system between peasants and knights (I talked about the 1st edition game). Why not here between thralls and vampires ?

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Fri Oct 18, 2002 4:06 pm

DFC ... you mean the We're Not Worthy trait ... interesting I'd agree.

I will say that I think the Thralls should REALLY be 50k ... ESPECIALLY if they can be apothecaried.

Yes, it makes them overpriced but the Vamps are WAYYYY underpriced.

Galak

Just for the record these are the traits that DFC is thinking of for the Albion (feudal) team:

Not Worthy (We're Not Worthy): This trait represents a player's tendency to be very subservent to what the player believes to be his betters. When a player with this Negative skill is holding the ball at the beginning of the turn, roll a D6 before moving any other player (other than Wild Animals). On a 1, the player becomes overwhelmed with fear that holding the ball will be seen as overstepping his "bounds". The player must then move immediately and before finishing his move, he must hand off or pass the ball to a player that does not have the We're Not Worthy! skill (if no other player without the We're Not Worthy skill is within Long Bomb range, the player will drop the ball at the end of his movement which will result in a turnover.) A player who has failed his We're Not Worthy roll MAY NOT move into any square in the scoring endzone during that turn. A successful We're Not Worthy roll means the player may move as normal any time after the Knights have moved.

Greater Glory (Greater Glory to Me!): This trait represents a player's tendency to adopt a superior attitude over those he considers his lessers. When a player with this Negative skill wishes to Hand-Off or Pass the ball, roll a D6, on a 1-3, the player refuses to give the ball to someone who is his inferior and will not hand-off or pass to anyone with the Not Worthy trait; otherwise he may Pass or Hand-Off as normal. In addition, a player with this skill MUST be moved before any other player that does not have this trait during a turn or he cannot move at all. The only exception to this will be if a player gains Wild Animal through a special play card or a failed Not Worth player, these players may go before a player with this trait and then players with this trait are moved.

Players found loopholes so they become a little more detailed in description to cover the FAQs. However Mestari I think these two negative traits are what you had in mind.

Galak

DaFrenchCoach · Post by **DaFrenchCoach** » Fri Oct 18, 2002 4:18 pm

yeah, this is exactly it Galak. Thanks

In rance, it was called "Syndrôme révérenciel", for all the frenchies here. As far I could remember, it was a funny thing... But I'm talking about 1st edition games... Have you use dit in one of your leagues (MBBL 2?)? Many thanks in advance for the feedback.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:35 pm

The above two skills have been used for 2 season (ie about a 1 1/2 years) in the MBBL2.

Galak

DaFrenchCoach · Post by **DaFrenchCoach** » Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:42 pm

Hum... And what is the general feedback ? I mean, does it sound enough like a negative trait which may make the Vampires roster a little bit less overpowered ?

I guess the team is on www.midgardbb.com (which is on the road of 50k visits ... Good luck

, so I will try to play a match with.

Another silly quesiton: I suppose this trait is implemented in PeBM Software ?

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Fri Oct 18, 2002 10:38 pm

The negative skills described above would probably work fine, but I just wanted to suggest something else that seemed a little more vampish. How about any time a vamp gets a cas, he loses his TZ for that turn to represent that he was feeding on the victim, call this trait bloodlust or something like that. Alternatively, remove the vamp with the cas to rep the fact that he is still feeding, though this has kinda the feel of OFAB but not exactly. I dunno, maybe this whole ideas SUCKS!

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 8:57 am

I quite like Galak's idea, but if adopted I don't think thralls should be 50k.

Ian

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 12:41 pm

Corlus wrote:I like those ideas, but how many coaches are going to want that many tactical descisions taken out of their hands?

Well the dice rolls could be made 3+, but then they should be done also every time the player gets in possession of the ball.
Seriously, I see no other way to have all those AG4ST4 players about!
The Greater Glory (for me) -skill, even though it is an excellent skill as such, is not sufficient to deal with the vampires.

The Me!Me! -trait does take a lot of bite (

) away from the vamps because they'll find themselves forced to make daring attempts with those super-players. And this is a price that a coach should pay in exchange for the superplayers that vampires are.

Also, about the claim that they are complicated: I don't think so. Vamp gets the ball - roll a d6 - failed - you have to move him as far as possible towards the EZ. Simple, really. Included in the rule above are the inevitable FAQ questions that the simpler rule wording would cause.

The I'm not worthy-skill might be sufficient for the thralls, however, although I'd rather have it at 3+ than 2+, just to be on the safe side.

MickeX · Post by **MickeX** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 1:13 pm

I don't think either of those negative traits are enough.

The number of vampires must simply be restricted - I'd say to one. This is just as arbitrary as any other number, and I don't see why the supply of vampires interested in Blood Bowl has to be comparable to the number of sauruses, chaos warriors, black orcs, and so on.

I want the vampire team to be the odd team in the league. This could be done by making it about as powerful as halflings or goblins, rather than another powerhouse. So here's a suggestion:

0-1 Vampire Lord 200K 6 5 4 9 Reg, Hyp Gaze (G, AG)
0-2 Dregs 70k 5 3 3 8 Sure Hands (G, P)
0-15 Thralls 50k 5 3 2 8 (G)
Re-rolls 70.000
No apothecary
No big guys

I tried this team, with Blodge added to the vampire lord as if they'd played a game or two before, against an orc team and they definitely had more of a sporting chance than halflings does. They were close of getting even, and the match was never easy for the orcs - even when they'd manage to KO the vampire lord with a foul.

This result is also a nail in the coffin for the idea of having several vampires. If a team with one vampire lord is comparable to orcs, what would four vampires be like!?

Fluffwise, this is what I've been thinking:

- I like the idea of thralls. To get the "necromancer & vampire"-feeling you can already have an undead team and hire Luthor from time to time.

- I picture the vampire lord being this really arrogant star that more often than not gets his plays ridiculed by the hunchback thralls. Seeing him trying to pass the ball to his thralls, to get them some SPP:s, isn't really in line with the fluff - but it could be quite hilarious...

- No apoc is not just about underpowering, but also for the feel of it. A vampire lord would never bother with an apothecary for these thralls. And the team will have plenty of money anyway considering the limited supply of position players

I think that a vampire team is a good opportunity to make a new kind of team - in the same way as for example lizardmen or halflings are different. In this case it would be a team with a deep flaw: too much dependence on one player.

By restricting position players severely, making RR:s expensive and overpricing all players, you could end up with a team that is as challenging as goblins or halflings - definitely not impossible, but not for the powerplayers either.

The important thing is that it's fun both to field and to play against. I think a team looking something like this could be just that: there are a number of different tactics and development strategies to try out, and it's not obvious which way to play against it either.

I first posted some ideas about this team at
viewtopic.php?t=2256&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15
Some parts of that discussion has been copied in this text.

MickeX · Post by **MickeX** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 1:17 pm

On more thing: the 50k thralls are easily defended fluffwise - I mean, who'd play for a vampire psycho? Surely vampires must have serious problems with the supply of servants...

Morg · Post by **Morg** » Sun Oct 20, 2002 6:02 am

Although the Me!Me! skill combo is a very nice idea I find the "one super vampire - rest crap" composition more appealing. Additionally, I don't think that the Glory skills et al would really hinder a fully stuffed vampire team which has 3 or 4 of these beasts on the field - thralls would be only needed to stand around and shield the stars.

The lone vampire team suits the KISS principle better for me. And having another underdog besides gobbos and halflings is funny, too.

The biggest problem I can see with the standard vampire team so far is the unnecessary amassing of Hypnotic Gaze. Try to hold a defensive line against 3 or 4 vampires with this skill - it's almost impossible.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sun Oct 20, 2002 7:30 am

I would just like to point out on thing.

Take a Chaos team ... require all the Chaos Warriors to go first EVERY turn before the Chaos Beastmen and then tell me how much the team was handicapped vs a normal Chaos team.

The Greater Glory skill posted above really does have a massive impact on game play.

I'd be more than happy to play with the following team:

1 Vampire Lord 150k HG, Reg, Greater Glory
0-6 Vampire 110k HG, Reg, OFAB, Greater Glory
0-12 Thralls 40k Not Worthy

70k Rerolls
Apothecary for Thralls only

Trust me ... this team would DEFINITELY be balanced. I'd bet serious money on it, becuase I've seen the problems teams with this combo face. And the team would definitely have more of a Lord and Servant feel.

Galak

Oh and yes, Greater Glory and Not Worthy are already programmed into the PBeM program.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sun Oct 20, 2002 7:35 am

Also please remember that OFAB now per BB Mag #4 doesn't need rolled at the beginning of a drive if you failed the roll the last drive.

So if you have 6 Vampires and 2 drives per a half ... the break down would be:

1st drive: 3 Vampires play
2nd drive: 4 Vampires play
3rd drive: 4 Vampires play
4th drive: 4 Vampires play

The old OFAB would have been 3 each drive, the new one would give you an extra Vamp per a drive with 6 on the team.

Galak

Add Greater Glory and Not Worthy to the team in BB Mag #4 and I'll accept it.

Talk Fantasy Football

Negative traits for Vampires

Which vampire system you prefer

Negative traits for Vampires