Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
 Posted:
Jul 30, 2014 - 21:57 |
 
|
|
plasmoid
Joined: Nov 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Sep 09, 2014 - 23:58 |
|
Back to the original suggestion. (Yay, thread-necro).
I just had one of those games that - to me - summarize why this is a good idea.
I'm playing a rookie Wood elf team, 2nd game, and before you say that I get what I deserve, these are NTBB woodies, the kind that Garion thinks has been gimped too hard.
Anyway, turn 3, a linemen dies. I don't use the apoth, because I'm saving it for more important players. The situation would be the same with the suggested apoth.
Then, turn 11, a 2nd lineelf takes an AG-. I consider ignoring it, but decide that with just 5 turns left my odds are good. Apoth fails.
So I'm Down 2 players with 5 turns of carnage to go. If a 3rd elf bites it, then I really don't think it would be a bad idea for that elf to try his luck with the apoth as well.
I think games with 3+ bad injuries are not unlikely in LRB6, and these are the games that send teams into a rough downward spiral. That's why I like the OP's suggestion.
Cheers
Martin |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2014 - 01:56 |
|
|
plasmoid
Joined: Nov 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Sep 12, 2014 - 21:15 |
|
Ha! as it happens, in the above mentioned game, I just got Throw a Rock on the dead turn kick-off.
Killed a lineman.
So that's 3 players lost in the team's second game.
That sort of underscores my sentiment that the OP's idea doesn't really affect most games - but it does somewhat diminish the risk of an overkill game.
Sigh. |
|
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Sep 12, 2014 - 21:54 |
|
| plasmoid wrote: | Back to the original suggestion. (Yay, thread-necro).
I just had one of those games that - to me - summarize why this is a good idea. |
One game is not really anything to base changes on.
I suspect what is really needed is a bit less variance on the casualty side rather than less of it: fewer of the really high cas games but about the same average. |
|
|
fidius
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 12, 2014 - 22:16 |
|
One change to consider is only rolling on the Injury table on a natural 10-12. Anything else (due to MB, Stunty, Niggles) and it's a BH. Same CAS, less long-term effect. |
|
|
Overhamsteren
Joined: May 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 12, 2014 - 22:57 |
|
Current apo is a pretty good game mechanic, new suggestion not bad either.  |
_________________
Like a Tiger Defying the Laws of Gravity
Thanks to the BBRC for all the great work you did. |
|
tmoila
Joined: Nov 25, 2012
|
| Posted:
Sep 12, 2014 - 23:36 |
|
| fidius wrote: | | One change to consider is only rolling on the Injury table on a natural 10-12. Anything else (due to MB, Stunty, Niggles) and it's a BH. Same CAS, less long-term effect. |
That would be great too. Nigglies wouldn't actually add to the chance that player explodes completely, just makes him less reliable in a single match. Same for stunties. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Sep 12, 2014 - 23:43 |
|
| fidius wrote: | | One change to consider is only rolling on the Injury table on a natural 10-12. Anything else (due to MB, Stunty, Niggles) and it's a BH. Same CAS, less long-term effect. |
I like that a lot too. |
|
|
DrDiscoStu
Joined: Feb 20, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 13, 2014 - 00:43 |
|
I like the idea of being able to choose your odds to an extent like
"On a 2+ the player is SI roll on the SI table"
Or
"On a 3+ the player is BH"
Or
"On a 4+ the player is placed in reserves box"
Or
"On a 5+ the player is prone"
So you basically choose based on the player and now desperate you are to win.
Could add some funny fluff to explain the apoths methods |
_________________
Check out my fishing and camping blog.
The Black Pearl Bounty-Board.
GUARD CONQUERS ALL! |
|
|
|
Jump up on a tree?
Search
