EgorKDie
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Sep 24, 2003 - 09:10 |
 
|
Ski Wrote
| Quote: |
I was removed as an unnecessary table top rule.
|
Wow!!! Ski used to be in the tabletop game (frantically looks through the books...) heh. |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 24, 2003 - 15:41 |
|
| Mr-Klipp wrote: | ...
"If you take an action with another player before moving all Wild Animals, then your opponent can call you for illegal procedure exactly as if you had forgotten to move the Turn marker."
Note it says take and not declare. It still feels slimy as hell, however per the exact wording in the book it seems that this may be legal. |
Ewwww.... That's pretty weak, but probably true. I feel dirty just saying it, however.
Regarding the Big Guy Arms Race, I didn't mean to imply that it was specific to FUMBBL. It's just that with the rate at which teams grow and the number of coaches here it may seem that much larger in scale. I mean, really, how many tabletop leagues get 350 games in every day? Even in England? |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
skummy
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 24, 2003 - 16:03 |
|
This is true, but look at it this way. If a player doesn't move his turn marker, you can call him on illegal procedure when he declares an action with his player. If he then fails to move it again, you can call him again when he starts moving that player. Your friend is trying to get around the rules, and it's just not what was intended. The WA has to move first or the player loses their turn. It's that simple. |
|
|
Mr-Klipp
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 25, 2003 - 00:11 |
|
I see what the intention is skummy, but that's not what the rule says. Read it again, and it's really quite clear. It says take, so you cannot call it until he actually takes the action, and after that there is no provision for calling it again for him continuing the action he is already taking. |
_________________
Looking to get your minis painted? Look no further.
The Finishing Touch |
|
Revener
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 25, 2003 - 00:30 |
|
Another reason that we have lots of BG's in the teams could be that it is easier to buy them here + no minis to order and paint. Just click and your done and it is easier to get money for one on here too since we play more games in a short time than you normally do IRL.
btw I would be glad if GW got rid of the BG's for all teams but stunty.
I think that it is silly that orcs that have 4 ST4 BO's and 4 Blitzers can have a BG. Chaos and Chaos Dwarves don't need them either..... |
|
|
MixX
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 26, 2003 - 22:37 |
|
| Revener wrote: | Another reason that we have lots of BG's in the teams could be that it is easier to buy them here + no minis to order and paint. Just click and your done and it is easier to get money for one on here too since we play more games in a short time than you normally do IRL.
btw I would be glad if GW got rid of the BG's for all teams but stunty.
I think that it is silly that orcs that have 4 ST4 BO's and 4 Blitzers can have a BG. Chaos and Chaos Dwarves don't need them either..... |
Ahh, that warms deep down... I hate Big Guys, IMO they do a lot more harm to the game than they add. This being said I doubt they will be removed by GW, and until such a time as they were (again, this isn't going to happen) they will (and should) stay on Fumbbl... anyway, stunty teams can have them, that would be okay.. in the perfect world, no that's wrong, in MY perfect world, only stunty teams have Big Guys, Big Guys couldn't take Block and I would have stayed on topic... |
|
|
MixX
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 26, 2003 - 22:52 |
|
Ok, since the comments on using a RR to avoid using the Wild Animal makes me sick, I have read the rules again and will at least try and say why I think this is illegal...
It's true that it says you have to "take an action" with another player in order for the WA to cause a turnover. However, IMO "Take an action" does not refer to a complete blitz, pass or whatever in the usual meaning of "action" , it means action as described in the "forgetting to move the turn marker" part. Which is this:
"An action is considered to be moving one or more
squares, or rolling the dice to throw a block, pass the
ball or dodge"
Thus, moving the Storm Vermin (or whatever) he can be called for Illegal Procedure. He uses a re-roll. Then once he moves the Storm Vermin on, he can be called again, since the Wild Animal description says that moving a square is an action in this sense... This is rather convuluted, but I think this is how it was meant to be anyway (ie no cheesy moves from the Skaven, excuse the pun).
Anyway, I think this should be enough for making it one of those "open to interpretation" rules, in which case Fumbbl or whatever league you are playing in is free to rule it as they see fit! Ok, you are always free to house-rule it as you see fit, but if you (like Fumbbl) try to get as close to LRB rules as possible, you need some basis in the rules for any interpretations, no matter how wrong this feels.
I am aware that for Fumbbl this is rather academical, since the client doesn't support this cheesy behaviour (you HAVE to move that Rat Ogre, and that's it! Period!)
Just my 0.02$... okay, it got rather long in the end so let's just say it was my 0.05$. Plus inflation, consumer taxes and various fees, that adds up to my 0.25$. Payments in cash only please.. d'oh, sorry about the lame ending, but I'm tired! |
|
|
Bonehead
Joined: Sep 20, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 07, 2003 - 12:26 |
|
The new rules for Wild Animals aren't very good. Why would a wild animal lie on its back instead of getting back on its feet? With these rules I think Wild Animals should be given jump up. |
|
|
Tinkywinky
Joined: Aug 25, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 07, 2003 - 13:36 |
|
If the player with the low moral takes his storm vermin and places him directly where he can support the RO you don't get a second chance to call him for Illegal procedure. It's really to exploit the rules though and should be forbidden by the other players of the league. |
_________________
Do you play ranked and wonder where all the good coaches are? Are you also from Sweden? Then join the Swedish league! |
|
psikobunny
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 07, 2003 - 15:46 |
|
The argument is pointless now Tinkywinky. Read the new WA rules if you aren't familiar with them. The new rules stink, turning blitzing machines into candy***es that stand around screaming their lungs out. WA are now worse than trolls. At least trolls can have a friend point them in the right direction... |
|
|
Mr-Klipp
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 07, 2003 - 16:05 |
|
| psikobunny wrote: | | WA are now worse than trolls. At least trolls can have a friend point them in the right direction... |
Psh. The WA also doesn't need to roll at all to block, and *never* loses it's tackle zones. It's about on par with a troll, but certainly no worse.
WA used to be the least negative negatrait of them all, the player that was supposed to be a "wild animal" was instead *the* most controllable big guy of them all.
The pendulum has swung back, they are now in line with trolls, and those players used to having the best of the big guys are complaining. |
_________________
Looking to get your minis painted? Look no further.
The Finishing Touch |
|
Tinkywinky
Joined: Aug 25, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 07, 2003 - 16:09 |
|
Yes I know the new rules I just commented on the issue. It affects other things too. IT came up once in a tournament match we had. it's 1-1 in the last turn and one player has a player that is totally free to make a TD. He moves him in directly without moving one square at a time and his opponent yells "Illegal procedure". The scorer had no RR and the goal meant falling out before the finals for the yeller. As the scoring coach wouldn't go forth to anyway he accepted the IP. What is correct? |
_________________
Do you play ranked and wonder where all the good coaches are? Are you also from Sweden? Then join the Swedish league! |
|
Golgomoth
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Dec 07, 2003 - 16:31 |
|
 I may be completely wrong here, and excuse me if i am as i'm still learning the game, but......before rules review I had to move my mino 1st and now I dont. If i'm missing the point sry. |
|
|
Mr-Klipp
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 07, 2003 - 16:46 |
|
| Tinkywinky wrote: | | As the scoring coach wouldn't go forth to anyway he accepted the IP. What is correct? |
I don't exactly follow you. Are you still talking about a situation with a WA? If not, there was no illegal procedure.
An illegal procedure only happens from two things.
1. Not moving the turn counter before starting your move.
2. Not moving a ball and chain player first (and before the rules review, a WA player.)
Also, don't forget that you can argue an illegal procedure call, just as you can argue a foul call or a secret weapon ejection.
On that note, does the client ask you if you want to argue when you get an ejection? If not, someone should probably point that out to Ski. |
_________________
Looking to get your minis painted? Look no further.
The Finishing Touch |
|
Jugular
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 07, 2003 - 18:04 |
|
Yes Mr. Klipp the client asks if you want to argue an ejection.
I saw no problem with WA's being the most 'controllable' of players if we look at Norse teams they have complete controllability even though it's supposed to be filled with psychopaths. Certainly it seems foolish that a WA would roll around on the floor "Roaring in Rage" whereas with other Big Guys it makes a certain amount of sense. I don't have a solution to this sticky problem however i thought the downside of the WA trap perfectly balanced their controlability. Maybe in lower TR games the WA was a more powerful skill but as you get to high TR teams when half the team have Gaurd they became a serious liability. Obviously the turnover following the WA trap was highly frustrating and quite counterintuitive however I still felt that it was a better solution to the 'fluff' than this rules change. |
|
|
|
|
TSC Draft
Search
