Posted by MattDakka on 2017-09-04 16:46:26

Expensive Mistakes
If Treasury is 100,000 or greater roll a D6, apply the Modifier based on current Treasury, then check the EM Table:

Treasury Modifier

100-199k +4
200-299k +3
300-399k +2
400-499k +1
500- +0

Expensive Mistakes Table

1 Catastrophe (lose all but 2D6x10k)
2 Catastrophe (lose all but 2D6x10k)
3 Catastrophe (lose all but 2D6x10k)
4 Major Incident (lose half, rounding up to nearest 10k)
5 Minor Incident (lose D3x10k)
6 Minor Incident (lose D3x10k)
7 Crisis Averted (no loss)
8 Crisis Averted (no loss)
9 Crisis Averted (no loss)
10 Crisis Averted (no loss)

Posted by MattDakka on 2017-09-04 16:48:40

After you have updated your roster you have to check for the Expensive Mistakes.
The check starts when you have a Treasury of 100,000 or higher, so if you had 100,000 and you were saving then you have failed the test.

Posted by Cyrus-Havoc on 2017-09-04 17:00:24

I tend to agree it's a spoiler. It is a necessary rule to stop the ridiculous large amounts that accumulated before. However it starts too low, 150k I think is about right.

Posted by mister__joshua on 2017-09-04 17:10:02

Unusually, I actually quite like Expensive Mistakes. I think it's tidier and fluffier than Spiralling Expenses, and while they don't serve exactly the same function I think EM works well.

Posted by Lorebass on 2017-09-04 17:20:11

Also keeps people from always having perfect full positional teams. makes the games and setups more interesting. but thats my opinion!

Posted by MattDakka on 2017-09-04 17:24:02

I agree with Cyrus-Havoc, starting the check at 150k would be ideal.
Alternatively, keeping the check at 100k but increasing slightly the winnings income (for example adding the TD difference and a bonus based on the gate).
With the current winnings teams with expensive positionals may struggle to replace them; on the other hand, Piling On removal reduced the attrition suffered.

Posted by Verminardo on 2017-09-04 17:53:41

Win the next game you'll be able to buy your Witch anyway. ;-)

Posted by truckerpunk on 2017-09-04 18:06:49

Lol... So if you have 100K or 110K in the bank, and get lucky, a catastrophe can end up with you making some more gold? (I'm not up to date with the rules, as you can tell).

Posted by bujke on 2017-09-04 18:24:43

truckerpunk, no because the modifier to the d6 roll would be +4 so the worse you can get is 5 Minor Incident (lose D3x10k)

Posted by MattDakka on 2017-09-04 18:32:14

@Verminardo: he will not buy the Witch the next game because he retired the team: https://fumbbl.com/p/team?id=886331

Posted by bghandras on 2017-09-04 19:05:35

Is it an idea to waste 10k the next time so you can surely buy the witch?

Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2017-09-04 19:21:23

He's right, Expensive Mistakes is a terrible rule.

Posted by MattDakka on 2017-09-04 19:36:59

Overdog team being able to buy inducements at start of the match without giving inducements to the underdog team is a terrible rule.
Expensive Mistakes is a poorly designed rule but not so bad.

Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-09-04 20:14:18

Why do you think I settled in on High Elves as my team? None of this EM nonsense.

Posted by CroixFer on 2017-09-04 21:08:55

Agreed. The overdog inducememts is absurd....