BB2k1 Topics for October

[GalakStarscraper]

Thanks Anthony ... I get that in the Q&A along with clarification that they Halflings and Goblins should not be able to freeboot Morg.

Galak

[Zy-Nox]

Thanks Anthony ... I get that in the Q&A along with clarification that they Halflings and Goblins should not be able to freeboot Morg.
Galak

No morg for Gobbos?
We allowed him to be freebooted at his original price,190k which seemed fair, It takes them so long to get that cash though
Ok could we get spp's for big guys who accurately throw team mate,with the ball and successfully landing.?

[Thadrin]

I FORGOT SOMETHING!
This will probably get done anyway, but just to throw some weight behind it....

Dwarf Alchemist to be replaced by a freebooted Runesmith.
(my suggested rules: viewtopic.php?t=420&highlight=runesmith )

and of course the free Halfling Master Chef thing.

[Mestari]

Dwarf Alchemist to be replaced by a freebooted Runesmith.

Hoorah! The exact rules need to be considered carefully, but this is exactly the way the rules must go!

About the Halfling Chef: I can't see the point of giving it for free, but I agree that the 50k is a bit too much for him. Just lower the cost to some 20-30k, but they do need their own "money sink", IMO. This should be stated in the hot topic-list as an alternative suggestion.

About Jump Up:
You should be able to use it with Pass Block. But I sympathise with the idea that this'd make it kind of mandatory to have the JU/PB combo so that the JU can be used completely. So, I also support the change where you can jump up the player during your turn, so that the player doesn't have to take the action immediately, so you could for example pass to him, and then move him around. That'd definitely make the skill a lot more effective, if not even too effective.

About the LRB:
A bit of a side note but: On the living rule book page, there should be a simple list:
1.0 Released xx.xx.2002 Maybe some comment
1.1 Released xx.xx.2002 Maybe a comment here too

And this'd be updated every time a new version comes up, so people will know that - the 1.1 version just appeared there without it being mentioned anywhere in the news-section (or I was temporarily blind when I searched for it).
Also, on the disclaimer page it should say that every time a new version is released, you are allowed to download one copy for free. Now it seems that you can't download an another version without a written permission:

3. A single copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, educational or research use and reference. Additional copies, whether electronic or otherwise, may not be made or distributed without the advance, written permission of Games Workshop Limited.

[Mestari]

I forgot something also:

1. Change the passing procedure so that the pass roll is made before the intercept roll to remove the enormous switch of odds when sombeody tries to intercept a pass likely to fumble. Check an example from: http://www.talkbloodbowl.com/phpBB2/vie ... 1abbb0805c and admit that this case is well founded

2. Let players take traits also on a roll of 'x' (could be 7, 5 or 3, whatever you feel is the correct increase in the amount of traits chosen). To promote a wider selection of skills that the players have. If '7' is felt to increase the number of traits too much, then use 5 or 3 (or maybe 11?), which increase the odds a bit less, but still introduce the scenario where you don't have to choose between a trait and normally non-allowed skill.

3. Introduce a Sigurds rule for getting stat increases (this has been changed to reflect the peoples desire not to have mandatory stat increases):
A) If the original roll is 10+ and not a double, roll a d6:1-3MA,4-5AG,6ST. Then choose between that increase and a normal skill
B) If the original roll was 10+ and a double, then roll d6 as above, but choose between stat increase and any skill.

[bj0rn]

1. Change the passing procedure so that the pass roll is made before the intercept roll

ive played bloodbowl by making the pass roll before the intercept roll for as long as i have played by the square measurement...8 years or so, and take it from me...it works like a charm and switching to using the "correct" rules just seems silly.

bj0rn - ...

[bj0rn]

you will reach the point where your team continues to develop with skills but you cannot grow anymore. The BBRC did not want to put a true ceiling on team growth. The package of rules is there to say ... yes you can grow to 300 and beyond but its going to cost you in wear and tear on the players and the inability to replace people.

so, there is talk about fixing the ageing and niggling effect...which should make this system effective.

but what if the teams can not afford to lose players when this happens, because they CAN'T (ever) afford to buy new players. their income simply doesnt handle that demand.

high rating teams are supposed to be "popular" among the fans and the players...i know that "good" teams are the ones the players want to play for. what happens to the players in the good teams when they are retired? its not like there is another team that is going to afford them anyway...(if you would implement some kind of player trade for your league)

the system has to work in a way where you can hang on to your players as long as they are at their prime.

personally i dont like this ageing stuff very much...

id much rather like to have serious injuries either niggling or stat decrease. or 1...is miss next game, 2...is niggling and 6...is a stat loss.

if you still want to have ageing, change that to stat loss only, or at least decrease the chance for a niggle.

add the niggle change of "+1 to injury for each niggle"...and i would belive the odds are going to play themselves out.

just a few suggestions...

bj0rn - ...

[Bob-the-Fish]

The first time I ever used the new ageing rules for a few games in my league, it didn't go over very well. We were all fielding new teams and it seemed like way to many players with one skill were losing stat points. It seems kind of lame to roll a S increase and then roll ageing and lose the damn thing(actually had this happen). If the ageing rules were implemented to stop super 300+tr teams from developing then I'd like to see them come into play only after a player gains his 3rd or even 4th skill. It really puts a kink in a team for their only player with more than 10 SPPs to have minuses to stats already with nothing to show for it.
At least if the decrease happened from an actual injury, some other player probubly got some SPPs out of it. I had one person that started a new team because just because ageing helped kill off his newest decent players(one with an AV decrease and another that missed 3 games in a row) and he didn't have the caah to hire new ones. We dropped the ageing rules altogether in my league just because they affected our low TR teams so much.
Also what happens when a team has a bunch of aged players? Nowhere that I see are there rules that allow you to drop or trade players so your stuck with this old guy who keeps missing games. If they keep ageing, there needs to be a way to either have more than 16 players or be able to drop players. It just seems like the rules that are supposed to keep down the power of long running teams have to much of an impact on the new teams.

[Zy-Nox]

Also what happens when a team has a bunch of aged players? Nowhere that I see are there rules that allow you to drop or trade players so your stuck with this old guy who keeps missing games. If they keep ageing, there needs to be a way to either have more than 16 players or be able to drop players.

Hi there Bob,
In the Deathzone Handbook it clearly states you can retire a player at any time,you simply cross him off and get an assistant coach.
This is to encourage a higher player turnover to stop sides getting to big.

[Bob-the-Fish]

Your right, you can retire players. Its been a while since I actually read that thing the whole way through. Maybe its time for me to check back through the all the rules.
Still the only real problem I have with ageing is that it had too much effect on starting teams. I'd be perfectly happy to use it with high TR teams with players that have 5 skills and need to do some sitting out to let the young guys play. I really think this is an improvement over appearance fees. It just needs a little tweaking. Maybe just changing the table so ageing starts at the 4th skill?

[Anthony_TBBF]

If anything, aging needs to be bumped up! It has almost no affect the way it works now, I've been playing under it since it came and I've only had players age twice in all that time. Trust me, it rarely happens the way it is now.

[Lucien Swift]

i wouldn't mind seeing the first skill exempted from aging, but then a more hyperbolic roll threshold after that (is that the right mathematical term?)

[Mestari]

It'd seem reasonable that the players wouldn't need not to make the aging roll for their first, or even for their second skill, and after that the aging roll would be a lot (1 or 2 upwards) harder to pass.

However, although it seems reasonable, for a high-end team, i feel that the fact that majority of the players have 1-2 skills is the biggest inbalancing factor - not the top-scorer alone. So changing the aging roll would definitely help the high-end teams to safely develop a strong core for the team, while only the SPP-racking stars would be subject to the aging effects.
So it might be better to leave aging alone. Still it can be really frustrating if your first two players with skills both get old at the same time :/

I haven't yet seen it in action enough to be sure if it has enough effect on the game. The effect could be small as Anthony claims, but I feel that it shouldn't have too much effect either.

[bj0rn]

i agree that ageing shouldnt have a possibility of effecting starting teams...

i also like the idea (because it was mine ) that you can retire an aged player and get a new player instead for free.

to be truthful: i dont like ageing!

...there, i said it. please, just make all serious injuries a niggling one instead...and add that +1 to injury for each niggling injury you have...

bj0rn - ...

[mrinprophet]

Lucien... I think it would be on a logarithmic scale.
Anyway, I like the idea of the 1st skill being free.