Am I the only one...

Dark Lord (retired) · Tue May 06, 2003 11:57 pm

that thinks thst Nurgle's Rotters shouldn't come anywhere near a chainsaw?
WTF is that? I just don't understand this stuff. Why do they need secret weapons?

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Wed May 07, 2003 7:49 am

Standard GW policy; if it's new it should have all the special rules that previous teams/armies combined have, or better verions of those rules. This is to prevent that one or two kids might actually decide not to collect this army/team too.

R

Agentrock · Post by **Agentrock** » Wed May 07, 2003 12:31 pm

Redfang wrote:Standard GW policy; if it's new it should have all the special rules that previous teams/armies combined have, or better verions of those rules. This is to prevent that one or two kids might actually decide not to collect this army/team too.R

Isn't that the truth. Everytime I see a "new" army list come out for WFB or 40K I tend to cringe...

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Wed May 07, 2003 12:55 pm

One of the clearest examples, to me, was when the Lizardmen and Bretonnia armies came out in 96? 97?

Suddenly the Brettonians got superb formations for their knights and archers (like other armies could copy that, yeah right) and those silly prayer rules etc. while all of a sudden Dwarfs (mentioned in the background as sturdy and never giving ground to their opponents) were running all over the fields in order to get away from virtually unbreakable Lizardmen with their way-over-top "coldblooded" rules. (I hope these changed with the new edition, but I don't expect so, I'm not playing WH anymore anyway)

R

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Wed May 07, 2003 1:57 pm

Dark Lord wrote:that thinks thst Nurgle's Rotters shouldn't come anywhere near a chainsaw?
WTF is that? I just don't understand this stuff. Why do they need secret weapons?

DL, you can blame me for that. Chet, JKL, and I over the course of a month rewrote several pieces of his original article to get it ready for testing by the MBBL. JKL stopped returning emails near the end of the process .... so I'm not sure if he approved of where we ended up ... but at least I got his thoughts at the beginning.

When I look at the new Rotters rosters ... I don't see Chaos+ ... I see a roster that I think is just as balanced as the first Chaos roster. Chaos has also not done well as a race in either the MBBL or FUMBBL. So since Chaos = Rotters in my mind for strength ... I didn't see the reason to disallow the chainsaw.

See in 12 years of playing BB ... I've only had one player actually manage to use a Chainsaw against me. Normally I keep one player reserved to blitz him as soon as it starts, and except for that one time, I've taken out any Chainsaw that has come my way in a game. So I don't see chainsaws as a threat and as long as there is some justification for the team to have one .... I don't see the problem in allowing it.

In 2nd edition, every team could get the Chainsaw ... and to be honest I'm still of the mindset that as long as the team doesn't have AG 4 lineman ... that's still fine. ... and even Halfling teams could get Chainsaws in 2nd edition. A fun fact in the 2nd edition books talks about Halfling Tork Smallbones who took out one half the Orclands Raiders with a chainsaw in a match in '73.

So that's why its there in the MBBL. Has ZERO to do with trying to make the team better since I don't think Chainsaws do that ... to me Chainsaw on a Rotters team is a free AV 5 roll against a Beastman. Its has to do with the fact that Chaos gets them and its a weapon that I think most teams should have access to.

Galak

Dark Lord (retired) · Wed May 07, 2003 11:48 pm

GalakStarscraper wrote: When I look at the new Rotters rosters ... I don't see Chaos+ ... I see a roster that I think is just as balanced as the first Chaos roster. Chaos has also not done well as a race in either the MBBL or FUMBBL. So since Chaos = Rotters in my mind for strength ... I didn't see the reason to disallow the chainsaw.

This is what i don't get. When I look at dwarves, I don't see Chaos+ either. Hmmn. Where is their chainsaw + Big Guy?

GalakStarscraper wrote: See in 12 years of playing BB ... I've only had one player actually manage to use a Chainsaw against me. Normally I keep one player reserved to blitz him as soon as it starts, and except for that one time, I've taken out any Chainsaw that has come my way in a game. So I don't see chainsaws as a threat and as long as there is some justification for the team to have one .... I don't see the problem in allowing it.

See in 12 years of playing blood bowl I have never seen a problematic ogre on a dwarf team...

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Wed May 07, 2003 11:59 pm

You know, ogres on dwarf teams came in during 3ed Compendium1 when the Big Guy rules first came in. If they are going to be removed, I don't see why they can't be compensated like DEs were. Give them 2 more blitzers as well, either that, or more kinds of mechanical constructs (such as the steam golum idea in an earlier post) to put on the pitch. But I really don't think either of those will ever happen. It seems easy to add to other teams (why the hell were the Undead given 2 extra wights? and I don't care that their days are numbered, they're still the official Undead team), but when it comes to dwarfs, there are many more people wanting to take away from them (even though there is no evidence that they are overpowered).

Anyway, back to topic, I don't care about Rotters getting a chainsaw, don't like the team, so don't play them.

Balrog · Post by **Balrog** » Wed May 07, 2003 11:59 pm

Dark Lord wrote:See in 12 years of playing blood bowl I have never seen a problematic ogre on a dwarf team...

See that's because Ogres have only been allowed on Dwarf teams for like a year...

-Balrog

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Thu May 08, 2003 12:00 am

Balrog you are wrong, please read my previous post, ogres on dwarf teams have been around since 3ed.

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Thu May 08, 2003 12:01 am

See that's because Ogres have only been allowed on Dwarf teams for like a year...

Officially. Many leagues used the big guy rules jj made for 3rd edition. Personally i saw more problems with big guys on norse teams, but that was just in our league.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu May 08, 2003 1:10 am

Dark Lord wrote:This is what i don't get. When I look at dwarves, I don't see Chaos+ either. Hmmn. Where is their chainsaw + Big Guy?

Not playing this game DL. You wanted to know about Rotters ... you want to continue your Dwarf crusade don't hijack your own thread. Sorry to have tried to respond to your original question.

Galak

victorvoncarstien · Post by **victorvoncarstien** » Thu May 08, 2003 4:05 am

I have never actually had anyone secret weapon other than deathroller used against me, but it was never allowed on the pitch due to that handicap rule.

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Thu May 08, 2003 6:46 am

You roll for that after it played, so it will always be allowed at least one drive!

R

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu May 08, 2003 7:00 am

LRB wrote:APPEARANCE FEE: The player on the opposing team with the most Star Player Points has decided that he needs to be paid money to take the field against those bums.’ Roll a d6 and multiply the result by 5,000. The result is the number of gold pieces the player must receive before he will take the field. If he isn’t paid, he’ll sit in the Dugout, refusing to come out until his fee is met or the game ends! The opposing coach may choose to pay the appearance any time after the start of the match if he wishes.

Not if this is the handicap he means

Redfang · Post by **Redfang** » Thu May 08, 2003 7:16 am

hmmm...

Talk Fantasy Football

Am I the only one...

Am I the only one...

Re: Am I the only one...

Re: Am I the only one...

Re: Am I the only one...

Re: Am I the only one...