How I would change the block dice.
Moderator: TFF Mods
-
- Ex-Cyanide/Focus toadie
- Posts: 2565
- Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:55 pm
- Location: Near Reading, UK
Re: How I would change the block dice.
Am I right in thinking that 1, 2 and 10 will result in a turnover regardless of the attacker having block/wrestle? So the odds of turnover for 1d blockers increase to 1/4? Only blodgers will have 1/6 odds of a turnover on their own block dice?
Reason: ''
-
- Super Star
- Posts: 835
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 4:36 pm
- Location: Italy
Re: How I would change the block dice.
1, 2 will result in a turnover (because the Attacker is knocked down), 10 will not result in a turnover.
If the Attacker has Dodge, 2 is just an Attacker pushed back; Tackle, if present on Defender, counters Dodge on the Attacker.
10 is Defender Down (no turnover because the Defender, not the Attacker, is knocked down without being pushed back, i.e. it's a Pow without push back, Dodge can't prevent it).
In the case of an Attacker player without Blodge, results of 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 will cause a turnover (1/2): this is on purpose greater than BB 1/3 turnover odds in order to discourage rampant 1 die blocking typical of poor coaches.
In the case of a Block/Wrestle Attacker player results of 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 will cause a turnover (5/12).
In the case of a Blodger Attacker player against a Tackleless Defender results of 1, 3, 8 will cause a turnover (1/4).
In the case of a Blodger Attacker player against a Tackler Defender results of 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 will cause a turnover (5/12).
If the Attacker has Dodge, 2 is just an Attacker pushed back; Tackle, if present on Defender, counters Dodge on the Attacker.
10 is Defender Down (no turnover because the Defender, not the Attacker, is knocked down without being pushed back, i.e. it's a Pow without push back, Dodge can't prevent it).
In the case of an Attacker player without Blodge, results of 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 will cause a turnover (1/2): this is on purpose greater than BB 1/3 turnover odds in order to discourage rampant 1 die blocking typical of poor coaches.
In the case of a Block/Wrestle Attacker player results of 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 will cause a turnover (5/12).
In the case of a Blodger Attacker player against a Tackleless Defender results of 1, 3, 8 will cause a turnover (1/4).
In the case of a Blodger Attacker player against a Tackler Defender results of 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 will cause a turnover (5/12).
Reason: ''
![Image](http://fumbbl.com/modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/7018948714f7352955a174.gif)
- Shteve0
- Legend
- Posts: 2479
- Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 10:15 am
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
How I would change the block dice.
Personally, I think that the block dice is the single greatest innovation the game has to offer and can be considered perfect as is. Just an "IMHO".
Reason: ''
League and tournament hosting, blogging and individual forums - all totally free. For the most immersive tabletop sports community experience around, check out theendzone.co
- Sandwich
- Star Player
- Posts: 556
- Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 4:36 pm
- Location: Godmanchester, UK
Re: How I would change the block dice.
I agree wholeheartedly with this.Shteve0 wrote:Personally, I think that the block dice is the single greatest innovation the game has to offer and can be considered perfect as is. Just an "IMHO".
There are plenty of things that could do with tweaking in the game, I'm not convinced the block dice are one of them.
Reason: ''
Stunty Cup: NAFC 2014, WISB IV
Most TDs: Cambridge Doubles 2011, Carrot Crunch VI, Boudica Bowl
Wooden Spoon: STABB Cup 2
Most TDs: Cambridge Doubles 2011, Carrot Crunch VI, Boudica Bowl
Wooden Spoon: STABB Cup 2
-
- Super Star
- Posts: 835
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 4:36 pm
- Location: Italy
Re: How I would change the block dice.
I quite agree on the block dice innovation, but I don't consider them perfect.Shteve0 wrote:Personally, I think that the block dice is the single greatest innovation the game has to offer and can be considered perfect as is. Just an "IMHO".
A St 3 Block player can -2dice-block a St 5 opponent without too muck risk of failure, and, generally speaking, the Block dice cover few possible outcomes.
Reason: ''
![Image](http://fumbbl.com/modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/7018948714f7352955a174.gif)
-
- Ex-Cyanide/Focus toadie
- Posts: 2565
- Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:55 pm
- Location: Near Reading, UK
Re: How I would change the block dice.
The risk is pretty high at 11/36, I think. You're not going to want to try it as your primary plan, that's for sure!
A lot depends on what you think the relative power between stats and skills should be, and I think the designers gave us a hint that they think skills should be important when they put in the "modified or unmodified 1" rule for fumbling a pass.
I do agree that some outcomes aren't covered, but wonder if that simplicity isn't actually a good thing for positional skills.
A lot depends on what you think the relative power between stats and skills should be, and I think the designers gave us a hint that they think skills should be important when they put in the "modified or unmodified 1" rule for fumbling a pass.
I do agree that some outcomes aren't covered, but wonder if that simplicity isn't actually a good thing for positional skills.
Reason: ''
-
- Experienced
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:53 am
Re: How I would change the block dice.
This. With the proposed block dice, low stat teams, which are already on the losing end of the arms race, would suffer even more.dode74 wrote: A lot depends on what you think the relative power between stats and skills should be, and I think the designers gave us a hint that they think skills should be important when they put in the "modified or unmodified 1" rule for fumbling a pass.
As Chaos for instance, I would be tempted to just forget about Block since it becomes an almost negligible factor and concentrate on Guard, Tackle and ClawPOMB.
I really like the fact that currently 4 outcomes out of 6 dictate that the defender is pushed back. That means the active player may build some sort of positioning strategy.dode74 wrote: I do agree that some outcomes aren't covered, but wonder if that simplicity isn't actually a good thing for positional skills.
Reason: ''