LRB 6.0

[Joemanji]

Agree with Jon. Blocking is statistically more deadly than in LRB4. It's just fouling that is weaker, and only cheasy chumps need a +2 Dirty Player to enjoy themselves.

[Boromir_of_Gondor]

When I have a jump-up, piling on, mighty blow, tackle, + Str Orc blitzer, there is much blood, I can assure you!

[Purplegoo]

I shouldn't think even the chumps of cheese (I thought that was our secret nickname! We have a funny cheddar handshake, and everything... ) disagree to any significant extent on the blood transition, afterall, if I read one more argument over MB/PO being too much, or spam eyeless and tacticless fouling, my eyes will dissolve!

'S all BB in the end, LRB 4, 5, 6, or even Dave McRuleman's Crazy Houserules of Madness (TM). It's the arguments over matters already set in stone that rile me.

[wp]

Agree with Jon. Blocking is statistically more deadly than in LRB4. It's just fouling that is weaker, and only cheasy chumps need a +2 Dirty Player to enjoy themselves.

I disagree. Claw is weaker, Fangs is deseappared. Piling On is changed and I think that the 4.0 version was more effective. The other skills involved in the blocking are unchanged.

Probably I'm a cheasy chumps enjoying myself but not for the +2 Dirty: for the IGMEOY...

[GalakStarscraper]

I disagree. Claw is weaker, Fangs is deseappared. Piling On is changed and I think that the 4.0 version was more effective. The other skills involved in the blocking are unchanged.

The problem is that the math doesn't agree with you.

LRB 4.0 ... you need 2 doubles to get a Claw/RSC player

LRB 5.0 ... three NORMAL skills rolls will get you Claw/MB/Piling On which is MUCH bloodier than Claw/RSC.

Yes its three skill rolls vs two ... but the odds of getting those 3 skills is 100% on 3 skills rolls. Whereas the odds of getting a Claw/RSC player after three skill rolls is around 7.5%. When you think about this math ... you'll understand that your gut feel about less blood ... doesn't match the math.

Galak

[Boromir_of_Gondor]

snip

LRB 5.0 ... three NORMAL skills rolls will get you Claw/MB/Piling On which is MUCH bloodier than Claw/RSC.

Yes its three skill rolls vs two ... but the odds of getting those 3 skills is 100% on 3 skills rolls. Whereas the odds of getting a Claw/RSC player after three skill rolls is around 7.5%. When you think about this math ... you'll understand that your gut feel about less blood ... doesn't match the math.
Galak

That's only for chaos or underowrld teams though!

[GalakStarscraper]

snip

LRB 5.0 ... three NORMAL skills rolls will get you Claw/MB/Piling On which is MUCH bloodier than Claw/RSC.

Yes its three skill rolls vs two ... but the odds of getting those 3 skills is 100% on 3 skills rolls. Whereas the odds of getting a Claw/RSC player after three skill rolls is around 7.5%. When you think about this math ... you'll understand that your gut feel about less blood ... doesn't match the math.
Galak

That's only for chaos or underowrld teams though!

And Nurgle and Chaos Pact.

4 teams out of 24 able to do that with normal skills is plenty to have the blood. And on that note ... the number of teams that can have Claw/MBlow/Piling On is now 3 more in LRB 6.0 (6 total) compared to LRB 4.0 (3 total).

Galak

[tchatter]

I am really getting confused by people that say GW can destroy the game?

Uh, I bought my rulebook. I printed out LRB5.0 which GW has on their website, I even saved the PDF. I also have a saved copy of the LRB5.0+ pdf. Instead of using a pencil I used a PDF editor to "pencil in" the changes from LRB5.0+ to LRB6.0.

I'm sorry, but if I want to set up a Blood Bowl league and run it from my house or even in my local Game/Hobby store I can and there isn't a damn thing GW can do about it. I BOUGHT the game, and I am choosing to play the game with house rules. What can GW do about it? NOTHING. Their own rules specifically state that the league commissioner can implement house rules.

Even if they stop making Blood Bowl miniatures, there are plenty of other places to get fantasy football miniatures.

A similar example of what is going on here is what happened with Paizo and their Pathfinder game. (www.paizo.com). Its essentially DND. Any one of us could re-write Blood Bowl with enough changes to have it continue on and there isn't a damn thing GW can do about it.

[Dwarfpete]

I´m watching this discussion for a while and decided now to write a few words here.

Thanks Galak for your work to get the LRB 6.0 done ... couldn´t imagine who could make it better! I´m still hoping, that GW is just waiting for the 1.1.2010 to make it official ... new year, new LRB!

well "hope is the last thing, that dies", as we say in germany

[plasmoid]

>I´m still hoping, that GW is just waiting for the 1.1.2010

Really?
I'm hoping they're waiting for april 1st 2010 to announce all this crap was just a prank.
Either way, joke's on us.

[Dwarfpete]

I'm hoping they're waiting for april 1st 2010 to announce all this crap was just a prank.
Either way, joke's on us.

O.K. Good point - however I prefer to laugh earlier in the year.

[Boromir_of_Gondor]

DwarfPete, I like your enthusiasm! I have decided to share it, and your hope too!

[Joemanji]

Piling On is changed and I think that the 4.0 version was more effective.

You think that a reroll on just AV is more effective than a reroll on either AV or Inj?

[Pug]

Firstly thanks to the Community and the BBRC for their own time spent, putting up with our moans and groans to get the LRB6 done. Cheers all.

Second....as a guess, the BBGT tickets are due to be avaliable 8th Feb, according to their blurb posters. So my guess is they just might release the LRB6 around that date. Maybe before hand.

[stashman]

I have a feeling that only the FUMMBL players are entushiasts of LRB4.

When FUMMBL get (if the do) a LRB5 or 6 upgrade I don't think they will keep playing LRB4.