| Poll |
| Which grammar style would you prefer? |
| Previous style - He/His/It/Its/etc. |
|
52% |
[ 23 ] |
| Modified style - The Singular They |
|
47% |
[ 21 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 44 |
|
Xeterog
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 23:23 |
 
|
Sure hands Agility 3 is fairly reilable.. Accurate works at all ranges.
I suggested it because I think that AG 4 is too much of an upgrade for the thrower, but don't disagree that they need something.
They already pick up the ball reliably (what, 89% or so)
Accurate would effectively make the Agility 4 for the 'job' their position calls them..throwers.
......
so looking at the numbers. Agility 3 with accurate vs Agility 4 throwing the ball. Exactly the same at Quick and short passes. Agility 3 fumbles less, but is inaccurate more, at Long and Bomb ranges. (They both have the exact same chances for an accurate pass at all ranges) |
_________________
- Xeterog |
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 23:56 |
|
I like a lot of the changes as well. There has already been some good discussion on the more controversial ones, I have nothing to add on that.
One that doesnt seem to be picked up though (because of no blue notes?) is the change to regen (successful regen goes to ko box rather than duggout). I can see that being quite a big nerf tbh.
Which links to my only other point which is to do with bigger squads and larger tvs. Something I am generally a fan of. However, I would like to see an additional incentive to run more than 11 players. There have been a number of suggestions re that in the forums before. The one I liked best was -10k to value for each successive reserve player, ie player 12 has -10k, player 13 has -20k etc.
Lastly, I would point out, the most commonly used "generic" pronoun in English has always been "he/him", and is still preferred by many people as it is a better fit grammatically than "they/them". In recent times this has become less popular, but for those who insist that correct grammar must have historical authenticity (as opposed to simply being in common use) then "he" remains the preferred option. This is much the same as the way apostrophes are used in English. Leaving them out is now considered good grammar in many places, although there is a large body of people and institutions who do not agree with that change in culture.
Because English is a "living" language (ie, the rules are not written down anywhere and can change all the time - unlike say French or Spanish) these kind of things happen frequently and are simply accepted by most English speaking people - although I'm sure it is infuriating for non-native speakers! |
|
|
WhatBall
Joined: Aug 21, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 00:04 |
|
Big rosters. Thanks for the reminder. I always wanted a way to carry more than 16 and elect which players would start each game. Next revision I will look at some solution to that. |
_________________
 |
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 00:12 |
|
Thats a change I would love to see as well, But I think it changes the nature of the game. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 00:18 |
|
We have discussed in the past that bringing back the 2ED rule of allowing a 20 man roster where you can select 4 players as benchwarmers would be very interesting from a tactical stand point. It would allow a lot more player specialization. |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 00:20 |
|
I like all the changes TBH. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 00:24 |
|
| Xeterog wrote: | Sure hands Agility 3 is fairly reilable.. Accurate works at all ranges.
I suggested it because I think that AG 4 is too much of an upgrade for the thrower, but don't disagree that they need something.
They already pick up the ball reliably (what, 89% or so)
Accurate would effectively make the Agility 4 for the 'job' their position calls them..throwers.
......
|
I agree it is a very large boost for humans.
Let me clarify my point. AG3 humans with surehands fail at a 1/9 rate. AG4 fail at a 1/36
BUT the boost really improves that pick up in 1TZ and then the dodge out.
That is were AG3 kills you. The dive in to TZ to pick up the ball and the dodge out. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 01:07 |
|
It's kinda funny that the speakers of the language with the most primitive grammar in the world also happen to be the ones who think of it the most expendable.
I think this is a big reason why other nations can be doubtful of the intellect that comes with it.
I for my part think the simple sentence structure forces to express thoughts in a way that makes them easy to understand. So it's actually a great language for learning and conveying knowledge. And this advantage can go a long way in accumulating knowledge.
However, the way English speakers talk about grammar, even their own grammar always makes me think they don't really understand the point of it all.
For instance when mrt1212 writes about the issues that arise from the antecedents, I can't help to wonder what else he thinks grammar is about.
Or when Xnoelx calls the usage of a plural form as plural form foibes of the English language when he really is just contradicting his former post based on which I build a sentence that looked really horrible and to me like it was void of grammar. I was in fact sitting in front of my screen for about 5 minutes, shaking my head and thinking: really? this is proper English? Especially the 's' was bumming me out. Bug I guess it's not implausible people would verbally communicate like that.
Grammar is in nature first and foremost technical. It does not reference to context. If it was about context, it would need no rules, it would be optional. It references to the word structure to make the sentence more accessible to the listener. It helps to understand what word you put in context of another word.
I'm not sure how common this is with foreign languages but I think a foible of the English language is that you tend to incorporate communicative shortcuts like they are done in verbal communication into written language. This is especially visible when two words are melted in a way like "it's", "we're" or "would've". In verbal communication it is not uncommon to neglect grammar for time constrain reasons but most importantly it is possible to compensate for that with pronunciation and accentuation.
The English language tries to avoid dealing with grammar by keeping words in a strict order. The downside to this is that really complex word connections are no longer conveyable unless you break them down into really simple terms.
That's one of the reasons why something as briliant as the Systemtheories by Niklas Luhmann are essentially untranslatable into English.
That being said in the context of the rulebook, the 'fixes' far exceeded grammar.
I think I made a fairly important point when I explained how there is a logic to the rulebooks word structure. Among which the term 'player' was included to be meant as a miniature.
Removal of that reference is not really about grammar anymore. It is a sign of incomprehension of the logic of the text and at the same time a continued destruction of it. A rulebook should aim to be almost mathematical in precision of word usage.
Meaning needs to be limited into a form where it is no longer ambivalent. In art and literature it may be fun to play with the meaning of words, to articulate and design entirely new ways of expression. Factual and scientific texts tend to go the other way. A dolphin can't be a fish because it is part of a system of categorization that places it amongst mammals.
Almost all communicative issues can be resolved with common sense. In the end orthography is just as expendable as is grammar.
But it's bad practice in factual texts to force people to have to rely on common sense when they are just in the process of figuring out how things work. And it's terrible reasoning to take a well structured factual text and to rip it apart for no better reason than that one feels the own version would maybe sound more like a breeze of flower petals. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 01:12 |
|
Ok, WhatBall, on your next revision you need to put the entire text through a Klingon translator and post that.
  |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 01:13 |
|
Grammar pointwise, I think I prefer 'they' over 'it'. However for a lot of the undead I think 'it' would actually work.
Personally I despise being politically correct when you had no intentional malice.
Do you remember my large roster system? Well I have been playing it for some time.
I also have a fairly free system for high TV teams. I'm playing the lrb 4 system, however money doesn't count towards the TV. I have a lot of teams now that are well above 225k.
It's great I love it, but I will say this. In mine Elves are dominating. I have 90 teams competing now and my premier league this year finished:
High Elves, Mixed Race good, Wood Elves, Dark Elves, 2nd ed Skeletons, Pro Elves, Dark Elves, Dwarf Slayers, Werewolves, Lizardmen
Coming up will be a pro/dark elf team and the Underworld Creepers (2nd ed). There's a Skaven and a Slann team that are looking frightening good too.
So by limiting the effect of claw and PO, removing SE and having a bench type system without something to compensate, will mean that Elves would dominate. Personally I don't mind it, but it's not balanced. |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 01:33 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | | Grammar pointwise, I think I prefer 'they' over 'it'. However for a lot of the undead I think 'it' would actually work. |
But is that still true if all the references of 'player' were actually replaced with 'miniature' like he claimed he would?
A miniature may move x squares, they...
A miniature may move x squares, it... |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 02:28 |
|
I thought Chinese had the most primitive grammar of highly used languages, but what do I know.....I will say though that Wreckage's English has come on a lot in the years he's been here.
Anyhow on topic
On my note above about elves dominating. My apoth is harder (see my topic on my larger roster). With yours, this helps elves further.
Removing FF from TV isn't something I'd like to see.
I like the price reduction for injuries systems. However I think I'd remove the price reduction on secondary injuries. An AG1 Zombie for example would still be better value than a standard zombie.
How about offering temporary ff or chearleaders for 10k in inducements?
I like the drop in price of mercenaries, that would be something to monitor. I think 10k is correct thing to do now, but my hunch is another 5k maybe the correct figure eventually.
I like the changes to claw (-2 to av instead of a straight av7) and of course PO too (ST5 players). Apart from No Hands on claw. As you pointed out claw pays a necessary part, and I don't think it needs a neg trait.
Decay is now the same as a niggling injury? If so I think that's a lost opportunity, and may as well be worded the same.
I think if anything I'd have gone the other way with loner. However changing it from a 3/3, changes it's synergy with pro..........I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not!
Hmmmmmmmmm ok I see the improvements to MB. You can get MB (2), this will change things a lot. There's a lot of big guy pimping here. Generally I'm pro. A cpomb (2) big guy though is going to be a monster. All hail the return of the minotaur.
Roster changes:
Zons: Wrestle on blitzers ok. Fend on linos hmmmmm no. Why do they get fend and everybody else dodge? It makes no sense fluffwise. For me I think I'd ramp up their rr cost to 70k instead or/and add some of the 5ks you thought about, we have them now!
Chaos: Not sure with the changes to MB and PO whether the mino needs a reduction. Certainly does in crp. You could go either way on that one.
CDs/Dwarfs: I dislike the name change from Longbeards really. Mainly as it limits future releases. I think we could drop Blockers/LongBeards for Linemen who don't have Tackle. Or do that and make Longbeards a positional.
HE: As discussed the 0-4 blitzers being a typo. They're 5k more than a DE blitzer.
Humans: It's a no for me, especially the throwers. But I can see why you did it.
Khemri: Yeah I like the reasoning here. I get the feeling you're against decay on the whole. I think that's a shame.
Zombies: Decay I think is a bad idea. Especially now as taking skeletons will be a no brainer on undead teams. Before the balance was pretty good.
Ogres: I probably wouldn't add a maneater. It's making ogre fluff awkward. Bringing back goblins is of course a good idea.
Orcs: Hmmmm no. I really like being able to take 4 goblins, it adds a different feel to an orc team. Of course the blitzer price hike was needed. Maybe 85k for BoBs instead of reducing them by one?
Vamps: I don't really see a reason fluffwise or game playwise of giving thralls TS. This team really should be and play like the lords and the peasants. I'd maintain the gap between them. If they needed a boost, the vamp lord maybe? A dumbed down version that can be bought for the roster.
A special rule maybe where you play an inflated price and with that theirs a chance your new vamp will be a super vamp.
Slightly better stats, an added skill or simply didn't come with BL. Worth a thought.
I'm not sure the count should come with dodge and ss (dodge is mentioned twice btw same with Morg and mb).
Of course I've just listed the things that I think could be improved or were better before. Everything else is a great improvement and would be a move forward.
Well done WB, nice work! |
|
|
krytie
Joined: Aug 16, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 02:29 |
|
I like most of the changes, but I think the minus tv for injured players is fraught with danger. e.g. Currently -ag linemen are generally kept on, old warhorses which are not as good as they once were, but can still do a job for the team. The coach must decide when they outlive their usefulness or he can afford to replace them with young blood. If we introduce -tv then suddenly these crippled players are in fact a buff, meaning the team is leaner, more efficient. In effect, certain injuries become a good thing, which is surely a bad thing..?
I appreciate the attempt to mitigate this via the Primary/Secondary stat designation but I still think it's too much. e.g. -ma-2ag rotter is now 10gp? A -2ag Fanatic is now only 50gp? yes please. Also, is it deliberate that half the linelves have ST as a primary and half as a secondary?
HUMANS:
I think the AG4 human thrower is too much of a buff. AG4 should be for inhuman types like elves, rats and suitable other supernatural beings. The aforementioned QBs are rare examples and hence should be thought of as having rolled an eleven and ascended, rather than being the standard for all human throwers. I understand that it would be useful to hmans to have such throwers, but that itself is not a reason to make it a standard. Similarly, starting with Accurate is also too much and removes one of their obvious skill choices, making rookies almosta complete package (generally bad for game design). Acc and +AG set apart veterans and stars from rookies, which is surely the way we want it?
If they need a buff in any way i'd be ok with Nerves of Steel -- ironically this should be a rare/superstar type skill but since it is usually ignored for more valuable skills, why not give them it for free? This helps boost their TZ pickups somewhat and also shows their ability to throw under pressure (from the pocket, if you like).
S3 Catchers - Long overdue. Maybe need to remove the Dodge starting skill but probably fine.
Summary:
LIKE:
POW/SKULL official definitions 
Big Guy buff
Fouling buff
Kickoff Blitz! (alternatively i suggest maybe only allowing widezone players to move.)
Kickoff PD
Smaller denominations (5gp, not 10gp)
Roster changes (except where noted above).
DISLIKE:
Injury TV buff
Skill change Claw = No Hands (Teen Wolf anyone?) How about Claw = -1 to pickup/catch/intercept ?
Skill change Decay -- now seems more harsh than before as 1/3 of CAS would result in career-ending injury rather than 7/36 currently.
50/50:
GFI - I like the added risk but since the current penalty is already high (possibly death!) this added modifier is quite severe. I suggest in combination with this new modifier that GFI fails are max KO, or even Stunned. (Leap and Dodge fails can stay as they are.)
Variable skill costs: this is actually quite a good idea but it would make many coaches heads explode
Overall I'd say it's pretty good as a starting point. |
_________________
There are three types of people in this world -- those who can count and those who cannot! |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 02:33 |
|
| Wreckage wrote: | | harvestmouse wrote: | | Grammar pointwise, I think I prefer 'they' over 'it'. However for a lot of the undead I think 'it' would actually work. |
But is that still true if all the references of 'player' were actually replaced with 'miniature' like he claimed he would?
A miniature may move x squares, they...
A miniature may move x squares, it... |
You could go either way again. It depends on your affection for the playing piece. Genderless toys that are loved would doubtfully be referred to as it. Just as we don't refer to babies as 'it' if we don't know their errrr it's gender.
To be honest I don't care enough about the issue to have a definite view. I think we could easily call most of the undead 'it' though. |
|
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 31, 2015 - 02:57 |
|
All methods are correct provided that you are consistent throughout. You are able to essentially invent your own system for doing things when you write a lengthy document. There is no right way in modern English.
NB: as I mentioned before 50 years ago there would have been no argument that the correct word would be "he". |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
