Piling On fix

[Snew]

My way (which, as predicted I seem to be just about the only one who likes it) is the middle road. By moving the ref marker, if you do nothing but pile on it has no effect on you. (except that you invite retaliation by fouling) But if you pile on AND foul, then you're asking for trouble.

For what it's worth, I like your idea. The skill, the way it is now is something I'd choose. The way it was before, well, almost no one took it.

The arguement that it doesn't make any sense not to lay the mini down before the armor roll doesn't hold water with me. This isn't real life, it's Blood Bowl. It's more important to keep things simple and have things standard. We should try not to have exceptions.

Your way would make it a little sketchier to use. If you use it, it's almost a guarantee he'd get fouled. That's okay with me. sounds like the way it should be.

[manusate]

Why not give pile on a penatly roll like fouling, because that's what it really is, a blatant foul on a player that is down (I can't see anything more blatant than throwing yourself on top of a prone player in an attempt to injure)

I agree that this is the way POn feels now, because you can declare the use of the skill after the armor roll. But Pile On is not a balatant foul at all: you don´t throw yourself on top of a prone player, you go all the way down with him using your bodyweight to flatten the guy into the ground. Pile On should not be related with fouling, because it´s not. Pile On might be super aggressive blocking, but not fouling. This is Blood Bowl after all, isn´t it?

But that´s not main reason why I don´t like wesleytj ´s idea. Main reason is that it doesn´t solve the timing problem that causes that you cannot fail when using POn.

I advocayte to bring POn back to the way it used to be. I makes much more sense that way. This is the simplest solution, just declare it before the armor roll. Any other solution like wesleytj proposed will probably tone it down, but the skill will still feel bad because the obvious timing problem.

Some might say that no one took the old POn before, but that was because it was too risky to use it then, but you have to take into account that under current IGMEOY rules the risk of getting fouled is not that big.


Manu

[dakkakhan]

But if you foul and then Pile-on you risk nothing.

[Zombie]

You risk nothing? You've got the ref watching you and a piller on the ground. The other team is sure to foul the sucker. I'd say that's risk enough.

[H. Hund]

I think the new foul rule is ok, but it is tough for dirty teams.
I dont think we shuld have that kind of rules for piling on.
By the way i agree with Zombie:

You risk nothing? You've got the ref watching you and a piller on the ground. The other team is sure to foul the sucker. I'd say that's risk enough.

[dakkakhan]

My bad guys , I was responding to the original post which states that using Piling-On would make a change in the IGMEOY counter, but would not cause a spot the foul roll. Therefore, if you foul first, or if the IGMEOY counter is already watching you, Piling-On has no further effect, as far as the suggested change is concerned.

Trust me, I want more blood, not less. I still roll a D6 for each of my players on the field during a Pitch Invasion to determine how many fans each player kills!

[plasmoid]

Hi all,
I totally agree with this fix
If you pile on, the refs eye is on you - which means you are open to retaliation.

Martin

[Acerak]

Why not give pile on a penatly roll like fouling, because that's what it really is, a blatant foul on a player that is down (I can't see anything more blatant than throwing yourself on top of a prone player in an attempt to injure). If there is a chance of getting tossed out, maybe some people will stop whining about how powerful the skill is.

We're doing something similar here, just amped up a bit. We're not using the Eye, but Piling On will have a Ref Roll attached. On a 6, you get tossed. (Attacking prone players is illegal and all that.)

As for the before/after mechanic - Piling On has a penalty for success, that's it. "You can't fail" doesn't really wash - you can have many rolls that don't use the skill, so you can certainly "fail" to use it, same as you can Mighty Blow. The difference? Mighty Blow doesn't force you to go prone when it works.

-Chet

[manusate]

The "you cannot fail" is a quite strong point. "Washes" pretty good methinks.

Let me explain:

"Old" Pile On (declare before roll):
Item: big bonus to the armour roll based on player´s ST.
Price: place your player prone.

"New" Pile On (declare after roll)
Item: Armour roll beaten.
Price: place your player prone.

See the difference????

Now you cannot fail when using Pile On, because if you´re about to fail then you´re NOT going to use the skill at all, are you? (let me suppose that you can add small numbers easily)

Nowadays, if you are placing your player prone means that you actually got someother guy´s armour beaten. If the +ST bonus was not enough to beat your opponent´s armor, then you just stand there like nothing happened... reason why Pile On is seen as kinda foul. (wich is not)

This skill will fail ONLY if you did one of those stupid things:
1) Drink until 3+5=x became a real hard algebra equation.
2) Consider that you failed if you didn´t beat the armour roll.

In fact, that´s why Pile On is a popular skill now. Because its overpowered. And it´s overpowered just because cannot fail. The "penalty for success" thing is just verbal make up, Chet.


Manu (I wish my english was better)

[wesleytj]

Why not give pile on a penatly roll like fouling, because that's what it really is, a blatant foul on a player that is down (I can't see anything more blatant than throwing yourself on top of a prone player in an attempt to injure). If there is a chance of getting tossed out, maybe some people will stop whining about how powerful the skill is.

See that seems like a bit much to me. Piling On isn't really fouling, there shouldn't be a chance of ejection. My idea was to make it AND fouling bad, and to make it possible/easy for the opponent to retaliate as if he had been fouled.

Not nearly as harsh IMO.

[Acerak]

Manu, let me try it like this:

MIGHTY BLOW: Use +1 to break AV if necessary, NO PENALTY FOR SO DOING

PILING ON: Use +ST to break AV if necessary, PLACE YOURSELF PRONE FOR SO DOING

See the difference?

-Chet

[Zombie]

If so many people believe there's a big timing bug here, then maybe there's a slight chance there's actually a bug, don't you think?

[manusate]

See that seems like a bit much to me. Piling On isn't really fouling, there shouldn't be a chance of ejection. My idea was to make it AND fouling bad, and to make it possible/easy for the opponent to retaliate as if he had been fouled.

If you want to make P On AND fouling bad, then just force P On to be declared before the roll (as it was before). The piling on player would be quite exposed on the ground (no matter if he succeeded or not) while the ref has his eye on you... bad news for him.

MIGHTY BLOW: Use +1 to break AV if necessary, NO PENALTY FOR SO DOING

PILING ON: Use +ST to break AV if necessary, PLACE YOURSELF PRONE FOR SO DOING

This "penalty for success" thing only applies on two skills, doesn´t it?

Let me guess... mmmm... Pile On and Diving Tackle, am I wrong?

Ok. You say it´s a penalty for success, I say they cannot fail. Maybe it´s the same thing, because both things take place ONLY on these skills.
Take the "no failure chance" thing, turn it upside down and call it a "penalty for success" or "beeblebrox syndrome" if you want to. It won´t solve the problem. Same dog with different collar.

My point is that no matter how you choose to name this "special feature", it is an exception to the rest of the skills.
So, if we admit that exceptions are being made on these skills, then why not change them to be declared before roll?

Things would be better if both skills were exceptions of the "choose after roll" rule. I really think so.

Manu

[dakkakhan]

Manusate is right.

You can switch the verbage to say that all skills are declare first, however we all know that since most skills (Block, Accurate, etc.) have no negative effect when used, it will be an "assumed declared" skill. Anytime the player wants to actually take the 'both knocked down' result he will simply point out that his player has the Block skill.

This will then result in the rules being worded in a standard manner, the result will be that coaches will simply have to actually declare Piling On and Diving Tackle.

No?

[Dragoonkin]

All skills are declare first doesn't really work though...does that mean that if I want to Dodge I have to declare it first?

Situation: I'm dodging away from someone. Do I have to declare my usage of the Dodge skill before I actually roll (thus negating my ability to use it for any subsequent dodging)?

You can't say "assumed used" and "have to declare all skills"...that doesn't work.