I hate aging!

carnage4u · Post by **carnage4u** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 2:52 am

yes Pariah and Zombie agreeing. I have read these boards for 6+ months and that is a rare bizarre thing that makes me question all things in life and ponder everything I ever belived..

but seriously.. They make valid points about the xp not being a good replacment for a bad system of ageing..

If you want to replace it. it must be something simple that donest make the character retire for getting.

I could "almost" tolerate ageing it waited to the 2nd skill before the first check and players could pick the neg effect, but i still think gaining a skill should never have a penalty attached to it.

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 3:07 am

GalakStarscraper wrote:
Pariah wrote:And if the problem you are trying to fix is the ageing at first roll then how does "7 exp's" fix it?
You can have 7 SPPs without having 7 EXP points Pariah ... you are confusing the two.

Yes exactly, I am confused myself. How do I explain this system to a rookie? What do i do with all of the team rosters I have?
But actually my question was what difference does 1 more EXP make in gaining an ageing roll? 6 games? Over and over again the BBRC said that tracking individual players was not an option. The reasons being that they didn't want to roll on each player after every game and didn't want a new column on the roster.
Suddenly a 180. Why? I don't see alot of support for it. The EXP system is okay, but that's it. It's no more or less effective than what we already have. It's just more complicated and requires more rolling of dice. Giving pro out like candy does the same thing. IT only causes more dice rolling.

There is a better way and I think we should look for it. There is no reason to stick to "pet" systems. The ideas you have put forth just aren't that great. Sorry but that's the truth. There are simpler methods out there that have yet to be tried. Let's try them before we add a whole new rules set that is just going slow the game down.

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 2:35 pm

Bloodbasher Masher wrote:Some sort of penalty is needed. Otherwise, those wardancers with 4 skills will be unstoppable..

That wasn't true in the old edition...you know who could stop said wardancer? An orc blitzer with 4 skills...especially if 2 of them were tackle and mightyblow. One negates one of the wardancers skills, the other emphasizes the major weakness of the wardancer (his armor).

Don't play an orc team, you say? No problem, just insert Dwarf Blitzer, Human Blitzer, Beastman, etc, or just about anybody else.

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 2:47 pm

Wes has a point but...

The problem is the time it takes for a dwarf blitzer to gain 4 skills compared to the time it takes a wardancer to gain 4 skills. Wardancers can get 6-9 SPP's a game pretty easily but a dwarf, orc, human, blitzer has a little harder time scoring 3 times a game.

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 2:49 pm

Pariah wrote:Wes has a point but...

The problem is the time it takes for a dwarf blitzer to gain 4 skills compared to the time it takes a wardancer to gain 4 skills. Wardancers can get 6-9 SPP's a game pretty easily but a dwarf, orc, human, blitzer has a little harder time scoring 3 times a game.

well if you do that then, you're not playing your wood elves right.

sure you COULD give your wd all the teams' td's and so on, but if you do the rest of your team is going to suck and the orcs/dwarves/etc above can just rip you, no matter HOW good your wardancer is. No wardancer is better than 11 orcs.

Bob-the-Fish · Post by **Bob-the-Fish** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 3:37 pm

[quote="wesleytj] No wardancer is better than 11 orcs.[/quote]

Truer words have never been spoken. No matter how good your best player is, if he's your only good player, you're in trouble.

Wood Elves will always get skills quicker than Orcs. The only way to change that is to make all the players on every team 6/3/3/8 like human linemen and where's the fun in that? Or give more SPPs for each casualty so Orcs get skills quicker for what they do.

As for Aging, I think it sucks. I don't like being penalized for scoring TDs and playing well. I run a league with younger players with less experience with the rules and adding more rolls and things to keep track of, like experience, would not help keep them interested in the game. Plus, it would just give me more things to keep track of as I have to make sure their rosters stay legal. Not fun.

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 4:05 pm

I'm not really a big fan of ageing either but the 4 guys in charge want one so we're gonna have one.

Personally, I'll stick to my guns by saying the best system won't rob players of their strengths and won't force retirement on coaches, like me, who find it dishonorable. That's why I like the niggle system. The star players will still play but eventually that player is gonna get killed. It's more exciting to me that way. Retiring a player is boring and sucks ass. Blood Bowl is about carnage and football.

To sum up...John Elway?

BORING!!!!!!

Joe Theisman?

Whoa. Cool!!!!!!

That's Blood Bowl! From the sound of the fluff it doesn't sound like most players end their careers doing infomercials. Screw retirement!

See, I'm the kind of sick bastard that will make a d100 table for players who get killed that describes 100 different sick and silly graphic ways your players can die...
Player 1, "6! He's dead! Roll on the death table!"
Player 2, "Okay, 45! Your guy broke my guy's ribs which pierced his heart!" or...
Player 2, " oh man! 23! Your guy knocked out my guy's tooth and he choked to death! What a puss!

dakkakhan · Post by **dakkakhan** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 4:26 pm

Heheheheh! MAKE THE TABLE!!!!!

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Sat Feb 08, 2003 4:28 pm

you ought to make it a d66 table if you're going to do it though, otherwise people would have to bring percentile dice.

Post by **Thadrin** » Sun Feb 09, 2003 8:26 pm

I played a whole load of White Wolf games so I have percentile dice coming out my ears.

ANyway, I LIKE the exxperience system. One of the three leagues I play in (two table top and RABBL) already did away with aging. Doesn't bother me, but one guy quit because his Dartk Elf team got murdered by some unlucky rolls.

EXP at least rips away the hideous skill-aging relationship. Its NOT complicated.
1 EXP=1 SPP. They are noted sperately. EXP are only replacing the MVP column for heaven's sake. When they reach a certain level you have to start rolling for aging. Is this really that complex?

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Sun Feb 09, 2003 9:10 pm

NO that's not complex. But adding MVP's back into the game with the EXP system is. You're gonna have linemen riding the bench gaining skills in their first game. That, my friend is freakin stupid!

Anyway, the only thing I have against the EXP system is that it's exactly what the BBRC said they didn't want for an ageing system. Now they want it? Why? Hmmn. I wonder? For PBeM it's fine but I'm not really into rolling all those dice after my games. It takes a long time, right at the point when you want to be done...especially if you just lost. It's one of those things that's really opens a door for cheaters too. A commmish or opposing coach isn't going to sit there while some a-hole rolls all his dice, one at a time. Cheaters will simply roll, roll, roll and when an ageing result comes up they'll ignore it and keep rolling. It's just not a practical system for the table top version and shows a sad trend of relying too much on PBeM.

Like I said, what's wrong with the niggle system that was put forward a long time ago? Was it ever tested? Did anyone even try to make a system that didn't force retirement on people?

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Sun Feb 09, 2003 9:24 pm

I've got no problem watching my opponent make approx. 16 rolls after a game, and I know those I play with wouldn't either, win or lose.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Sun Feb 09, 2003 9:59 pm

What is the niggle system?

I am with pariah that i don't the exp system and mvps, but I don't have a problem with rolling a d6 for all of my players after a match.

I also think giving players the pro skill sucks.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sun Feb 09, 2003 10:21 pm

Pariah wrote:Anyway, the only thing I have against the EXP system is that it's exactly what the BBRC said they didn't want for an ageing system.

Bullsh*t Pariah ... I'll forward you the email from the BBRC that I have from 1 1/2 years ago that said that a game based aging system was exactly what they wanted. The comments you are referring to was related to all the system where after 6 games a player rolled for aging ... not the same at all.

The BBRC was VERY specific, they didn't want something that made a team dread its 6th, 12th, and 20th games as an example. The email explaining skill based aging to the MBBL3 flat out said this is the best method that the group could come up with but that if a member could think of a workable game based system to let them know right away. The EXP system is the game based system that they wanted all that time ago.

I don't care that you are against aging in all its forms which is fine, but at least don't spread disinformation to prove your argument .... I know I've clarified this exact point about what the BBRC wanted when the first BBRC ruleset came out before with you.

Galak

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Mon Feb 10, 2003 12:39 am

I saw several posts and emails from Chet and Neo dismissing ideas that required tracking the number of games each player played and needing to roll on every player after the game.

I know they have changed their tune now. That's what I said. There are posts on this board where they said that tracking the number of games each player played would be too combersome to do and any system using that sort of rule isn't what they wanted.

I'm not spreading misinformation.