FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

Menoetius

Joined: Jun 22, 2008

Posted: Sep 01, 2008 - 19:19

Hi there! =)

My College's nerd club is starting up a bloodbowl league and we have been debating which ruleset we should use. We'd greatly appreciate any advice this forum has to offer in this regard!

Thanks =)

Purplegoo

Joined: Mar 23, 2006

Posted: Sep 01, 2008 - 19:23

Oooooh - can of worms time. Smile

I'd say read LRBs 4 and 5, pick the one you like, and add or subtract little bits you find annoying as you go, plugging the hole from the other ruleset. I'd prolly start at 5 though, since it's newest, unless you're all heavy FUMBBLers, then go 4.

Enjoy!

Unlife

Joined: Aug 18, 2008

Posted: Sep 01, 2008 - 19:24

You won't have a clear answer here. A lot of players will suggest you LRB5 and a lot of others will argue that LRB4 is better. Without any doubts I'm pro LRB5 ...

- For the new apothecary
- To have something to take instead of block
- For the inducement system (LRB4 handicaps are annoying)
- To match teams' TV instead of TR
- No ageing

And so on.

Unlife

EDIT: If you have players that already know LRB4, to choose LRB5 will also means "something different" ... That's not a bad thing in my book

Last edited by Unlife on %b %01, %2008 - %19:%Sep; edited 1 time in total

Astarael

Joined: Aug 14, 2005

Posted: Sep 01, 2008 - 19:25

*nods*

I agree with Purplegoo mostly. Unless you all play on Fumbbl then you may as well do LRB5 as it's going to be easiest for people to get hold of.

Of course LRB4 is better.

_________________
Oh my.

DonTomaso

Joined: Feb 20, 2005

Posted: Sep 01, 2008 - 19:31

LRB 5 is the wave of the future... BloodBowl wont (hopefully) degenerate back towards LRB 4 (or even 3).

If you learn LRB 5 you'll be all set for other tournaments as well.

_________________
====================================
Be careful, my common sense is tingling!

pac

Joined: Oct 03, 2005

Posted: Sep 01, 2008 - 19:32

Second edition. Razz

Menoetius

Joined: Jun 22, 2008

Posted: Sep 01, 2008 - 19:33

So far we're thinking of going for LRB5, but one problem we have come across is the money and fan factor system. We prefer the LRB4 system of 'gate' affecting how much you make. But this would mean using alternate rules for spiraling costs aswell. Any ideas?

Thanks =)

pac

Joined: Oct 03, 2005

Posted: Sep 01, 2008 - 19:39

Menoetius wrote:

So far we're thinking of going for LRB5, but one problem we have come across is the money and fan factor system. We prefer the LRB4 system of 'gate' affecting how much you make. But this would mean using alternate rules for spiraling costs aswell. Any ideas?

Well, more seriously, feel free to hack together whatever set of rules you like.

… However, house rules can lead to problems, as every time a coach runs into trouble (eg, his team gets beaten up and/or he is on a losing streak) he (not every coach is like this, but some always are) will tend to demand that the rules be tweaked to help him out (not that he'll put it like that).

If you stick with a single rule-set, one or the other, it's easier to avoid this, since the Commissioner can shrug and say, 'We're just following the official rules and I'm not going to open that can of worms by changing anything.'

At the least, it's best to lay down a clear marker and say that you're changing this much and nothing more, and the most you'll do is remove/adjust that change - not modify any other part of the rules! The most important thing is to ensure that you spend more time playing the game than arguing over which rules to use. Smile

All that being said, the table-top leagues I've enjoyed most have had major amounts of house rules shaping them. Then again, I was Commissioner and didn't brook disagreement. Wink

harvestmouse

Joined: May 13, 2007

Posted: Sep 02, 2008 - 04:02

pac wrote:

Second edition. Razz

I second, second edition.

Macavity

Joined: Nov 23, 2004

Posted: Sep 02, 2008 - 04:04

The Blue ones!

_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis

harvestmouse

Joined: May 13, 2007

Posted: Sep 02, 2008 - 04:11

pac wrote:

Menoetius wrote:

So far we're thinking of going for LRB5, but one problem we have come across is the money and fan factor system. We prefer the LRB4 system of 'gate' affecting how much you make. But this would mean using alternate rules for spiraling costs aswell. Any ideas?

Well, more seriously, feel free to hack together whatever set of rules you like.

… However, house rules can lead to problems, as every time a coach runs into trouble (eg, his team gets beaten up and/or he is on a losing streak) he (not every coach is like this, but some always are) will tend to demand that the rules be tweaked to help him out (not that he'll put it like that).

If you stick with a single rule-set, one or the other, it's easier to avoid this, since the Commissioner can shrug and say, 'We're just following the official rules and I'm not going to open that can of worms by changing anything.'

At the least, it's best to lay down a clear marker and say that you're changing this much and nothing more, and the most you'll do is remove/adjust that change - not modify any other part of the rules! The most important thing is to ensure that you spend more time playing the game than arguing over which rules to use. Smile

All that being said, the table-top leagues I've enjoyed most have had major amounts of house rules shaping them. Then again, I was Commissioner and didn't brook disagreement. Wink

This can be a problem. When I was part of a small table top league, this happened from time to time. We got around this 2 ways however. Firstly rules could not be changed mid-season. Secondly all our teams were based off of the NAF teams and there was a loosely set hierarchy. We all had a few good teams each, of different styles.

So one rule change that would favour one of your teams, wouldn't favour another. If a favoured team constantly underperformed they'd be either downgraded or the team composition twiddled to bring them back up.

In this way the 'Bright Crusaders' were the most dominant team ever in our league. In the bb book, they were an average team for being too gentlemanly.

pac

Joined: Oct 03, 2005

Posted: Sep 02, 2008 - 11:34

harvestmouse wrote:

In this way the 'Bright Crusaders' were the most dominant team ever in our league. In the bb book, they were an average team for being too gentlemanly.

Average? They were awful! Razz

harvestmouse

Joined: May 13, 2007

Posted: Sep 02, 2008 - 18:56

pac wrote:

harvestmouse wrote:

In this way the 'Bright Crusaders' were the most dominant team ever in our league. In the bb book, they were an average team for being too gentlemanly.

Average? They were awful! Razz

.

I'm far too gentlemousely to say that. They did however transform from a human team to a mix raced teach. Where the 2nd ed rules were severely botched. Who cares if a elf can't hand off to a dwarf.........why would you?