C.O.F.A.B.

[Grumbledook]

its under 200 words hardly an essay

[GalakStarscraper]

Answered yes, but i don't like the way Galak describes it. Too wordy.

Always Hungry and Throw Team-Mate have basically the same or more words and everyone gets along just fine.

And its not my wording ... its Neo's ... d*mn it I hate it when you do that Zombie.

Anyway, simpler wordings create too much confusion with the possibilities. Tried simpler wording out with my league since we are using the team and rules in 2 weeks and was instantly hit with 10 possible exceptions. The way these rules are worded eliminate virtually any of the questions (at least all the ones that I got asked with a simpler wording).

Oh and Pariah ... look at the LRB ... you can only get 2 SPPs for casualties caused to OPPONENTS. So no you cannot get 2 SPP.

And vorner23 ... GW is not set on this team and this OFAB, the experimental rules are just that EXPERIMENTAL this means that what becomes official will most likely NOT be what was originally printed. Playtesting and league input will greatly effect the final team/rule. AND Neo is one of the members of the BBRC and the wording above is his wording of Cervidal's suggestion and he APPROVES of the change and is going to test it in his league like I am testing it in mine. And finally OFAB misses a drive just DOES not balance the Vampire team. I've played Vampires longer than any other GW team and OFAB just is not a balancer.

I also really disagree with Dangerous Dave's suggestion ... I think Cervidal's Off for a Bite is a much better replacement ... sorry Dave.

Galak

[Zombie]

And its not my wording ... its Neo's ... d*mn it I hate it when you do that Zombie.

I know, and that's why i keep teasing you that way. It's all in good fun.

[Dangerous Dave]

Galak....

Of course you can disagree!.... but only once of course!

I suppose it depends what you want from the OFAB trait. If you want a Vamp team to be 1 step above Flings and Gobbos then COFAB achieves that. My suggestion largely tries to make the team competitive (ie not too strong nor too weak) which most of us agree the current version of OFAB doesn't do.


Dave

[Thadrin]

Fluff says one step up from Gobboes and halflings is about right.

Maybe you could say "on a roll of one before each turn a RANDOMLY DETERMINED vampire goes into a feeding frenzy." That way it only happens once every six turns rather than every other turn as it otherwise would be.

Still not sure if we should really be appy with a team that has ST4/AG4 players though.

[Zombie]

Even with COFAB, i'm pretty sure that Vampires would be much better than most people here believe. Maybe even better than humans. Only testing can tell.

[Dave]

I voted 'yes' but after reading the posts and rethinking my experience as a vampire opponent (my brother plays them and fail a hilarious amount of OFAB-rolls)

I like the idea of the vamps being present in the drive after they've feeded, it's just plain obwious.

I DO think that a team that has 4 or 5 vamps is way too strong (soon them, got thoroughly beaten)

The rule could be changed in a much easier way: why not change the OFAB roll from 4+ into the crowd to 3+ (or 4+ on the pithc into 5+ on the pitch, doesn't really matter)

In this way the vamps will be less frequently on the field and the only one complaining are your fans!

Using the old rules vamps were off feeding 1 out of 2 drives.

Now he'll only be out there 1 out of 4 drives (if my math is correct)

Somewhere in between must be possible and seems nice to me.

I do like the idea of a vamp attacking his own team though, can't wait to see my bro execute that.

[franck_le_grand]

Is it a turnover if a vampire who haves the ball fails his COFAB and drop it?

[Grumbledook]

Ddropping the ball does not cause a turnover if you read the list of turnovers in the rulebook so no he doesn't cause a turnover.

[Zombie]

Dave, even if you made it 1+ he sucks the crowd, he'd still be playing every second drive with the current rule. Besides, it ain't fun having a negative racial caracteristic that only affects the player off the field. It also leaves to much to luck and not enough to strategy.

[GalakStarscraper]

Dave, even if you made it 1+ he sucks the crowd, he'd still be playing every second drive with the current rule. Besides, it ain't fun having a negative racial caracteristic that only affects the player off the field. It also leaves to much to luck and not enough to strategy.

Fully agree with Zombie. An off field mechanic no matter what it is will not work for OFAB.

Galak

[GalakStarscraper]

Is it a turnover if a vampire who haves the ball fails his COFAB and drop it?

Dropping the ball by itself is never a turnover ... just like failing a catch roll is never a turnover by itself.

Galak

[Colin]

Galak and Zombie actually agree on sonething, this may not be a first but it sure is rare.

[MickeX]

I don't really like any of the negative traist that's been suggested. Restricting the number of vampires properly - as I've suggested before I'd prefer only having one - and only giving them overpriced linemen should do the trick just fine.

For those who really want several vampires, why not just give them 6/4/3/8 and double progression?

The negative traits that makes different kinds of rolls for whether you may use your vampire or not are a bit boring, and makes the game depend too much on a few single dice rolls.

The ones that changes the way the game is played, like dictating which players are to move first, changes things too much. Vampires should be a new team, not a new game.

But the thing I'm most worried about is facing leagues with several vampire teams fielded by power players. I just don't like the thought of it.

Micke

[Zombie]

Only one vampire is not a vampire team. Double progression is gone, and for simplicity's sake, should not be brought back. Power players won't be playing vampires if COFAB is applied.