BB mag 4 & Vampires

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 7:53 am

Here's my opinion. I thought this was the first new team i liked since the LRB came around. The Khemri, Necromantic and all 3 Pact teams were huge disppointments to me. The Vampires, on the other hand, looked very good. Compared to 4th ed, they had:

1. A much more decent vampire lord. Loses block and dodge, only 30k less, can't get +1 ST on a doubles roll.
2. Many less vampires (6 instead of 10).
3. Cheaper thralls but more expensive rerolls.
4. No possibility to lose off for a bite.

This team looked very decent. So what changed my mind? The new off for a bite rule. Why did JJ have to change it? Before, you lost each vampire every other drive. Now, he's got a 1 in 2 chance of not showing up for the first drive, and 1 in 4 after that. That's nowhere harsh enough! Bring back the old OFAB and i'll love this new team. And i don't think it would be too powerful if only they could do that.

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 9:04 am

christer wrote:
If the Lord is killed a normal vamp gets promoted in his place. If there are no vamps available then the team disbands.
How does this promotion happen? Any stat changes? Off for a bite is lost? How about SPPs?

-- Christer

Stat changes to bring them in line - but retaining all skills and stat increases - and lose OFAB. Spps are kept.

That's the only way to lose OFAB.

So if you get lucky you might be trying to get your lord killed off...

Ian

christer · Post by **christer** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 10:29 am

Thank you Ian. Now, what's all this about a new off for a bite characteristic?

-- Christer

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 12:29 pm

I agree with Zombie that the team is much more decent than the 4th ed one.

I still believe that the paradox between the super-human nature of the vampires and the fact that vampire teams shouldn't be doing good in BB leagues cannot be cured by anything else except by negative traits that affect the players in-game.
Discussion on that subject can be found at:

http://www.talkbloodbowl.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2784

MickeX · Post by **MickeX** » Sat Oct 19, 2002 2:11 pm

1 vampire lord 150k 6 5 4 8 Regenerate, hypnotic gaze
0-6 vampires 110k 6 4 4 8 regenerate, hypnotic gaze, off for a bite
0-12 thralls 40k 6 3 3 7
re-rolls 70k

Even with the old OFAB rules this team would be far to powerful. And OFAB is definitely a boring rule - the outcome of the matches will be more or less decided in these few dice rolls.

You could get a comparable effect by changing the team into:

1 vampire lord 150k 6 5 4 8 Regenerate, hypnotic gaze
0-3 vampires 220k 6 4 4 8 regenerate, hypnotic gaze
0-12 thralls 40k 6 3 3 7
re-rolls 70k

That is, buy only half the number of vampire for a double price, but the'll always be available for play. (Yes, there are several differences, but none that is dramatic).

The second version shows just how overpowered the vampires are. Once they have Blodge they'll be nightmares.

The most important part is that the idea of seven vampires kicking the butts of another team might seem spectacular - but actually playing this game will bore the hell out at least one of the players. There is no need to make this situation possible in the official rules, just like there's no need for all-chaos-warrior-teams or a number of other perhaps fluffwise interesting situations.

Micke

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Sun Oct 20, 2002 5:14 am

I think the AG 4 is unecessary. They should be AG 3.
I think the best way to solve the problem would be to develop seperate vampire teams. Some with high ST and some with high AG.
I'm not a big fan of matching BB to WHFB but in this case I think it would be important. Otherwise, if these are just regular stereotypical vampires then why not a more Nosferatu type? Actually the whole deal with vampires being super agile is kind of a new thing. Count Dracula wasn't a gymnast, nor was any vamp that I can think of other than those crappy Anne Rice fags.

Vesticle · Post by **Vesticle** » Sun Oct 20, 2002 5:56 am

I hate them.

The Vampire Lord at ST5 has only 1 other player who's stronger (treeman). And he has more movement than any other big guy, and much more agility, while having no negative traits, having access to Agility skills, and can use TRRs.

The vampires, in 4 skills, can pick up Block, Dodge, Sidestep, and Guard, all without a single double-roll. And at ST4 and AG4, how does a team counter this, at all? Especially since with Hypnotic Gaze, you can easily take stronger players out of the play, since the majority have lower Agility (Dwarves, Big Guys, Mummies).

And I don't buy any arguments that the team starts off slow, and finishes ridiculously strong, and that the two balance out. To me that's like eating a pizza that's burnt on the edge and frozen in the middle...

Snew · Post by **Snew** » Sun Oct 20, 2002 7:10 am

Hey, if something as strong as the Vampire Lord doesn't have a negative trait, why not tone down Wild Animal on my Minotaur and Rat Ogre? They're no scarier that this guy!

Pallino · Post by **Pallino** » Sun Oct 20, 2002 7:57 am

1 vampire lord 150k 6 5 4 8 Regenerate, hypnotic gaze
0-6 vampires 110k 6 4 4 8 regenerate, hypnotic gaze, off for a bite
0-12 thralls 40k 6 3 3 7
re-rolls 70k

...
I think may be better:
1 vamp. lord 160k 6 5 4 9 Regenerate, hypnotic gaze
0-4 vampires 100k 5 4 3 8 regenerate, hypnotic gaze
0-12 thralls 40k 6 3 3 7
re-rolls 70k
No Big Guy

So the team will be Powerfull slowly (for the high price), when also the other teams will be powerfull (with big guy).
No Apotecary
No Wizard
Starplayer: I think someone have just a good manwolf with good stats
for this teams!

What do you think?

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Mon Oct 21, 2002 9:15 am

I think it might be a lot better if there are two different kinds of Vampires.
One kind would be having the ag4 with st3 and no access to Str skills while the other kind would be the other way around; ag3, St4 and no access to agility skills. This way they might not need the boring OFAB rule.
Another idea is to have the Vampires still have Ag4 St4 but to let them choose at their first increase whether they'll have access to general and str skills or to general and ag skills. This would at least tone down their skill access.

Furthermore, perhaps off for a bite would be better represented by the vampires being in some way attracted to dead(/dying) or injured opponents. That's open wounds! Must be interesting for Vampires, right?

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:10 am

I'm not overly happy with Vampire teams at all. I've always found them to be utterly, utterly broken.

As for the Anne Rice fags, every prat's going to have a Vampire Lord called Lestat now and I'm going to want to shove a stake through his sternum...

...the coach that is, not the player.

(edited to remove evidence of my inability to count)

McDeth · Post by **McDeth** » Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:36 am

Ok i haven't got a problem with the vampire lord, just the lesser vampires.

6 4 3 8 would be my choice, no OFAB and only 2 of em. After all how common are vampires??

Maybe add 2 Ghouls.

That i'd be happy with

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Mon Oct 21, 2002 11:11 am

Anyone care to take a guess how long a Lizardman team would last against a vampire team fielding (on average) 4 Hyp Gaze players?

Gaze 4 Saurus on a 2+ then clatter the skinks on 2 and 3 die blocks.

Balance?

I'd actually prefer to see gaze only available to the Lord. More than 1 or 2 Hyp Gaze players on a team is brutal.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Oct 21, 2002 11:24 am

Here's a quick thought and its simple to implement.

Keep the current rules for the team, but we are talking about Lords and servants here correct?

A very very simple crimp to the team would be to make the Vampires go first before any Thrall can go (once a Thrall moves Vampires cannot). We've experimented with a handicap like this before and it seems to be effective.

I understand the need to keep the rules simple, but this one really isn't much rules bloat and does make the team a little more difficult to play.

Galak

With this minor change, I think the Vamps would be okay.

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Mon Oct 21, 2002 11:35 am

Is that in addition to OFAB?

Ian