Talk Fantasy Football

Darkson wrote:I think fouling is to tame nowadays (I want the +1 for the fouler and IGMEOY back), but I wouldn't want to got back to the days of SPPs for fouls.

Bakunin wrote:You could, but then the eye needs to come back, so you only get 1 free foul.

These two nailed it. ^
(and to add to Darkson's point, IGMEOY would give us an obvious way of making sneaky git better. i.e. +1 to argue the call, and -1 to being spotted by the ref)

You shouldn't get spp for fouling. If you did it would lead to "spite fouling" - a term I have just made up this second for when you are losing have no way of pulling the game back so you might as well just stick the boot in every turn. This would just lead to bad feeling imo.

If you really want a house rule that rewards fouling the obvious, straight forward and best way to do this would be to count cas caused by fouls when totting up how much you are awarded to spend on redrafting. Currently only Cas that give you spp count when working out how much cash you get post season.

However this again would potentially lead to "spite fouling", guess it depends how you feel about that really.

It used to be that, just like taking MB first on a blitzer/blocker to get you to your second skill faster, DP was the obvious first skill for Linemen.

I once had a High Elf team with 14 players suffer 15 casualties in a game. One dirty player linerat on the other side was responsible for 10 of them.

SPPs for fouling should not come back.

garion wrote: You shouldn't get spp for fouling. If you did it would lead to "spite fouling" - a term I have just made up this second for when you are losing have no way of pulling the game back so you might as well just stick the boot in every turn. This would just lead to bad feeling imo.

I do that anyway

garion wrote:

Darkson wrote:I think fouling is to tame nowadays (I want the +1 for the fouler and IGMEOY back), but I wouldn't want to got back to the days of SPPs for fouls.

Bakunin wrote:You could, but then the eye needs to come back, so you only get 1 free foul.

These two nailed it. ^
(and to add to Darkson's point, IGMEOY would give us an obvious way of making sneaky git better. i.e. +1 to argue the call, and -1 to being spotted by the ref)

You shouldn't get spp for fouling. If you did it would lead to "spite fouling" - a term I have just made up this second for when you are losing have no way of pulling the game back so you might as well just stick the boot in every turn. This would just lead to bad feeling imo.

If you really want a house rule that rewards fouling the obvious, straight forward and best way to do this would be to count cas caused by fouls when totting up how much you are awarded to spend on redrafting. Currently only Cas that give you spp count when working out how much cash you get post season.

However this again would potentially lead to "spite fouling", guess it depends how you feel about that really.

I really like the Narrow Tier fix to sneaky git:

"Sneaky Git (Agility): The player is a sneaky silver tongued git. Whenever you roll for K.O. recovery, you may also roll a d6 for each sneaky git who is currently sent off. On a 4+ the penalty is revoked, and he may return to play provided that he isn’t KO’d or injured. To track the status of a git who is both injured and sent off, simply place him prone in the proper box of the dug-out."

Bakunin wrote:"....To track the status of a git who is both injured and sent off, simply place him prone in the proper box of the dug-out."

How can a player be injured and sent off? When one happens the player is removed from the pitch which also removes the opportunity for the other to happen.

garion wrote: You shouldn't get spp for fouling. If you did it would lead to "spite fouling" - a term I have just made up this second for when you are losing have no way of pulling the game back so you might as well just stick the boot in every turn. This would just lead to bad feeling imo.

This is considered good manners in our league.
People that do not "spite foul" their opponent usually get insulted for not doing it... often by the very same coach they are not fouling.

We put the blood in front of the bowl.

Our league gives 2spp for a foul that results in a death.

lunchmoney wrote:

Bakunin wrote:"....To track the status of a git who is both injured and sent off, simply place him prone in the proper box of the dug-out."

How can a player be injured and sent off? When one happens the player is removed from the pitch which also removes the opportunity for the other to happen.

indeed this rules tweak sucks. Just bring back SW rules instead of creating a convoluted amendment to a skill such as this, and have sneaky git effect the chance of being caught and arguing.

I have trialled this and the Sneaky Git works like guard in a pair of leagues that are still running strong going on 3 years now. It is clunky and messy having them go to the KO box, especially with the babes bonus. The version that makes it work like Guard is rubbish too. No one took the skill in 3 or 4 years to my knowledge, which is hundreds of games played.

garion wrote:

lunchmoney wrote:

Bakunin wrote:"....To track the status of a git who is both injured and sent off, simply place him prone in the proper box of the dug-out."

How can a player be injured and sent off? When one happens the player is removed from the pitch which also removes the opportunity for the other to happen.

indeed this rules tweak sucks. Just bring back SW rules instead of creating a convoluted amendment to a skill such as this, and have sneaky git effect the chance of being caught and arguing.

I have trialled this and the Sneaky Git works like guard in a pair of leagues that are still running strong going on 3 years now. It is clunky and messy having them go to the KO box, especially with the babes bonus. The version that makes it work like Guard is rubbish too. No one took the skill in 3 or 4 years to my knowledge, which is hundreds of games played.

The NTBB rule is not convoluted and works really well for league play. It makes it worth taking sneaky git.

Sneaky Git is guard was indeed not taken by anyone. Ever.

"4+ to get back from send-off whenever KO rolls are made" really isn't complicated unless you want it to be.
And yes, a secret weapon could go to the KO box, and get sent off too. B&Cs do it often enough.

Cheers
Martin

With the various referee rules giving fouling a serious debuff, it might need a buff too.

Just don't see how you're supposed to learn much by stomping on player's heads.

Baxx wrote:With the various referee rules giving fouling a serious debuff, it might need a buff too.

Just don't see how you're supposed to learn much by stomping on player's heads.

I agree. If using the new referees, fouling advantages could be boosted as risk is much greater. Sneaky git allowing players back would be a good one, actually, if you want to give another boost to stunties. It makes fouling much riskier for all the teams but them. Would make a new path for human catchers too (DP+SG, cheap player) and they might also need a boost. Not sure if there is another team with A access that will really benefit from this instead of taking their current paths.

plasmoid wrote:Sneaky Git is guard was indeed not taken by anyone. Ever.

"4+ to get back from send-off whenever KO rolls are made" really isn't complicated unless you want it to be.
And yes, a secret weapon could go to the KO box, and get sent off too. B&Cs do it often enough.

Cheers
Martin

B&C do it enough? That's not the same, they get injured, which is why they are in the KO box, they are not sent there nonsensically.

Anyway, to clarify when I say convoluted, its how the skill is written out in your version that's the problem. So if sneaky git is sent to ko box then Babes will work when helping get the player back right? Which has serious balance implications, death roller with sneaky git and 2 babes sounds hellish to name but 1.

Unless you add an amendment on to the skill description, saying sent off players don't get to use babes. Which is just messy/clunky. Because then you need to remember which players have been Ko'd and which have been sent off. This is especially clunky with ball and chain who as you say gets ko'd albeit when injured. So if you have a sneaky git ball and chain they are ko'd twice? or once? I would assume they would need to wake up from the ko, then roll to leave the ko box a second time, but it's just not clean enough for me, and doesn't encapsulate what sneaky git should be imo.

Then we have the issues with the fluff. Sneaky git is about avoiding detection, getting away with cheating. Getting sent off to come back on doesn't really make sense. Before anyway says it - I know this happens in the current rule set with argue the call, but its something they got badly wrong in 2016 ed. When arguing a call you should remain on the pitch if you are successful, this is how it always worked. The new rules here are frankly daft, they don't make any sense.

Sneaky Git rule should help you avoid getting caught, like it currently does, but it needs a buff. The skill is about being a master of getting away with it.

This player has the quickness and finesse to stick the boot to a downed
opponent without drawing a referee's attention......

Why create an unnecessarily long rule like the one above, when we could have had the almost universally loved SW rolls for starters, and now argue the call is back a really simple rule could have been -

During a Foul action, a player with this skill is not sent off by the referee for rolling doubles on the Armor roll if this didn't break the opponents armour. A player with this skill also gets +1 to argue the ref calls, and Secret Weapon rolls.

Simples...


p.s. Mind you, your version is still better than what we are now stuck with for another edition.

Hi Garion,
just to clear up a few things:

p.s. Mind you, your version is still better than what we are now stuck with for another edition.

Well, that's something, innit

Sneaky Git rule should help you avoid getting caught, like it currently does, but it needs a buff.

For what it's worth, I did discuss versions doing that with Doubleskulls and Galak, but Doubleskulls was worried that fewer send-offs could make fouling too good, and as the two (ex-)BBRC members had right to veto, then that was that. Not that I'm unhappy with the rule we settled on. For one thing, it is a nice skill for the gobbo SWs.

Anyway, to clarify when I say convoluted, its how the skill is written out in your version that's the problem. So if sneaky git is sent to ko box then Babes will work when helping get the player back right? Which has serious balance implications, death roller with sneaky git and 2 babes sounds hellish to name but 1.

I'm not sure which version you're reading, but the current one (which has been current for two and a half years, AFAIK) does not say anything about putting the player in the KO box. You can put him anywhere you like. It just says that you get a straight 4+ roll whenever KO rolls are made. Simple I'd think.

B&C do it enough? That's not the same, they get injured, which is why they are in the KO box, they are not sent there nonsensically

Eh?
All I'm saying is that currently a B&C can be KO'd on a drive, and then also get sent off at the end of the drive. So, both KO'd and sent off. And you'd need to decide whether to use your bribe before you knew the result of the KO roll.

Cheers
Martin