| Poll |
| Worth a thought/I'd give it a go? |
| Yes |
|
38% |
[ 10 ] |
| No |
|
50% |
[ 13 ] |
| Pie |
|
11% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 26 |
|
member1234
Joined: Mar 09, 2005
|
 Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 21:36 |
 
|
This is a thought I've often had that might get some traction here and now, given fumbbl is actually starting to look at moving from hard and fast "only CRP/GW" rules line. Albeit ever so slightly. Saying that though, Sunty league and the custom teams are further evidence of the sheer depth of creativity around.
How about really going outside the box, and looking at the rules right from the ground up? Of course keep the CRP division (s) and have that client and ruleset "finalised" but...
What if there were more options on the block dice, more types of casualties etc. What if the game didn't use a d6 based model, what about d8, or d20 (I don't think we will ever go from dice). Think of the variation that could introduce, even if just applied to base stats and block dice. Redress the skills, the teams, TV, bank, inducements whatever. Beyond house rules and into a similar, but new, game.
Often there is the complain, especially on fumbbl, the game is slightly too much based on luck due to the probabilities of the dice. Or that Block/dodge is too strong a skill, or that TV isn't the best matching skill in a long run environment etc. Why not build a rule set with all this taken into account? Why be bound by GW? (aside from number of players, hence why a strict LRB division will always be needed, it's what we all play and universally, in the BB world, known)
To actually be popular such a move would likely still have to be rooted in the same mechanics, and certainly to be viable with the client. Even within that, simply with examples of the above, there is a vast amount that could be done, yet still keep things pretty much as folks are used to gameplay wise.
But if it was possible would you play it?
I certainly would. (and if a Handbook as per Stunty was produce, I'd dive into playing it on the TT as well) It would be a mammoth task to undertake, even just the development of such a ruleset and the testing of it. But with the love of BB here and such an optimal testing bed, fumbbl could create such I believe.
Anyway, I could be blowing hot air from down below as per usual, but thought to toss this out. (And no reason why such a development would have to be on fumbbl, it would give it one hell of a platform though) |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 21:49 |
|
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 21:51 |
|
It just wouldn't be Blood Bowl though would it? It would be just the same as the many pretenders to the Blood Bowl crown out there.
We have enough problems with the rules we currently use. I can't imagine this idea however good would be worth the effort. |
_________________
 |
|
Beerox
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 21:52 |
|
D6 is sacred, you lost me early on there. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 21:53 |
|
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 21:59 |
|
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? |
_________________
 Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 22:02 |
|
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 22:04 |
|
Yes, they were, and I did. But again, I didn't spend time slaving away making new rulesets, or complaining about the ones we had. Just spent it enjoying playing the game. |
_________________
Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
Qaz
Joined: Apr 28, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 22:20 |
|
I play on Fumbbl could I play some thing better on Fumbbl than CRaP I would. It would how ever have to be both good and convenient |
_________________
Superstition brings bad luck.
"he who has relied least on fortune is established
the strongest"
Niccolo Machiavelli |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 23:04 |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 23:20 |
|
I'm perfectly ok with B being house-ruled, as long as it is IDed that way. Leave R to the official rules, and boogie. |
_________________
 |
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 23:32 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | xnoelx wrote: | | Yes, they were, and I did. But again, I didn't spend time slaving away making new rulesets, or complaining about the ones we had. Just spent it enjoying playing the game. |
If the rules don't suit a certain league there is not much incentive to play it. |
Absolutely. That's pretty self-evident. What isn't is that the rules don't suit any of our divisions. If they were such a bad fit in B, it wouldn't be so popular. I guess my main point is that everyone and his brother constantly moans about it, and has 'the perfect fix', yet the majority of them still exploit CPOMB to some degree or another. And that if they are so sure they can come up with the perfect fix, stop wasting all this time and effort whining, and hoping that someone else will come along and make it all better, like their mummy used to do. Spend that time instead making their own 'better' game, and let's see how that does. |
_________________
Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 20, 2013 - 23:52 |
|
| xnoelx wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | xnoelx wrote: | | Yes, they were, and I did. But again, I didn't spend time slaving away making new rulesets, or complaining about the ones we had. Just spent it enjoying playing the game. |
If the rules don't suit a certain league there is not much incentive to play it. |
Absolutely. That's pretty self-evident. What isn't is that the rules don't suit any of our divisions. If they were such a bad fit in B, it wouldn't be so popular. I guess my main point is that everyone and his brother constantly moans about it, and has 'the perfect fix', yet the majority of them still exploit CPOMB to some degree or another. And that if they are so sure they can come up with the perfect fix, stop wasting all this time and effort whining, and hoping that someone else will come along and make it all better, like their mummy used to do. Spend that time instead making their own 'better' game, and let's see how that does. |
Well I probably could create my own version of Fumbbl and build my own client. Though I suspect many here couldn't.
But that would be pretty stupid when Christer has proposed exactly the two changes that I would have first made. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Dec 21, 2013 - 00:12 |
|
Making a client and a site is a separate thing from making your own ruleset. That only requires being able to write. Then you could take several routes; producing the game in tabletop form, for example, or presenting it to sites like this as a completed product. If, as many think, they have the 'perfect fix', I am sure the inevitable groundswell of public approval for such an obviously superior product would lead to it's adoption onsite, or the creation of a new site... |
_________________
Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 21, 2013 - 01:08 |
|
| xnoelx wrote: | | Making a client and a site is a separate thing from making your own ruleset. That only requires being able to write. Then you could take several routes; producing the game in tabletop form, for example, or presenting it to sites like this as a completed product. If, as many think, they have the 'perfect fix', I am sure the inevitable groundswell of public approval for such an obviously superior product would lead to it's adoption onsite, or the creation of a new site... |
How hard can it be?
The site owner already appears to be giving it serious consideration.
Who is talking about perfect fix?
If you think that the game cannot be improved then lucky you. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
|
|
| |
War Drums?
Search
