| Poll |
| Worth a thought/I'd give it a go? |
| Yes |
|
38% |
[ 10 ] |
| No |
|
50% |
[ 13 ] |
| Pie |
|
11% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 26 |
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
 Posted:
Dec 21, 2013 - 01:51 |
 
|
I still have my stuff! Quick somebody make a 2nd Ed. Client!!! |
|
|
latulike
Joined: Jan 04, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 21, 2013 - 09:07 |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 21, 2013 - 09:20 |
|
| Craftnburn wrote: | | I still have my stuff! Quick somebody make a 2nd Ed. Client!!! |
Lol, god can you imagine how hard that would be 
I wish I had the skills though, I totally would if i knew how. |
_________________
 |
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 24, 2013 - 15:41 |
|
| member1234 wrote: | ...
How about really going outside the box, and looking at the rules right from the ground up?
... |
There are two main questions to consider, I think.
1. Is the ruleset intended specifically for online play only or do you want it to be streamlined and playable on tabletop, too? It's a compromise either way and I'm not sure where I land on this one.
2. At a high level, what are the elements of the game that make it fun? This is a tough one, but take a good hard look at some of them to see whether we play it this way because it's more fun or just because that's how it has always been played.
Rolling for skills and the current roster structure would be examples of things I'd ditch (... says the guy who wants team management to be entirely luck-free and decision-based to go along with on-field action that's even crazier).
Finally, a hypothetical new custom rule set would be the real opportunity to completely strip and rebuild all the existing fluff. It'll be a tough fight to swap out Skaven and Nurgle for Ratmen and Plaguebearers, but it seems the only wise move.
That way, your hypothetical new game is a completely new game, perhaps inspired by - but in no way making use of the trademarked contents of - another game which happens to be owned by an occasionally-hostile corporate entity. |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 24, 2013 - 15:56 |
|
| xnoelx wrote: | | If I wanted to play 'not BB', surely I'd just spend my time playing Elfball, or Dreadball, or Grind, or any of the other 'not BB' games that already exist, rather than slaving away to make another? |
The problem is that you can't play online Elfball, Dreadball or Grind.
(Well, there is a Vassal Elfball client but you and your opponent must know and apply the rules, it's not an automated client). |
|
|
WhatBall
Joined: Aug 21, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 24, 2013 - 15:57 |
|
I've had a lot of fun with doing Stunty Leeg, and would be up to doing this, but it would only be under a very specific framework. The rights for the rules would have to be bought or Christer committed to changing FUMBBL (or a division within FUMBBL) to a new rule set. Neither of which seem too plausible right now, but I hold out hope. To just start coming up with a new rule set for the sake of it would be a horrible slog and it is hard to do all that work thoroughly and properly without the understanding that it will be used.
I think there are a lot of areas to make initial small tweaks to improve the rules and move on from there. I see it as being a positive for TT and online at the same time, as a lot of the big issues with perpetual online play do not arise in TT, so altering rules to address these issues has little to no effect on TT play (especially tournies), if anything, helping long term TT leagues out. |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
| |
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
