pizzamogul
Joined: Jun 13, 2005
|
 Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 02:52 |
 
|
Look at it this way: under Nelphines interpretation you can perform dodges until you fall and avoid a "failure to feed"?
Can I paste the Bloodlust text from my ungutted copy of LRB6? That's a no-no, right? |
_________________
"Don't expect mercy."
-Woodstock |
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 04:18 |
|
I do agree that it doesn't make much sense to interpret it that way; but my gut says you should be allowed to bite the thrall after failing the pick up attempt.
Then I read uuni's interpretation, and my gut seemed to be wrong, so I went into rules lawyer mode; and you can only have uuni's interpretation if feeding becomes part of the action; but there is no reason for feeding to be part of the action unless bloodlust is part of the action; and if bloodlust is part of the action, then turnover interrupts the send off. And this means a) failing a pick up doesn't send you off the pitch AND b) failing a dodge doesn't send you off the pitch.
Which DOES seem kind of silly based on our common sense. But you have to get rid of bloodlust as part of the action in order to avoid it - and that seems to mean that feeding can't be part of the action either.
Which results in us being allowed to bite the thrall after failing a pick up. Which makes sense to me.
So either, if you cause a turnover you avoid failure to feed; or you are allowed to bite a thrall after failing a pick up. Take your pick. (Obviously, this is my opinion, but I think it's hard to logically argue with it.)
I'm going off of the rulebook I use, which might have mistakes I suppose, or at least different language? |
|
|
Igvy
Joined: Apr 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 04:34 |
|
There is only one flaw in what you say.
You seem to have this assumption that bloodlust is linked to feeding. I see them as totally seperate.
To me
- Bloodlust is an event - if this vamp doesn't feed he runs wildly into the crowd to bite the nearest maiden.
- Feeding - the biting of a thrall, must be done as the very last stage of an action.
I find it illogical and inconsistent that you feel both need to be treated the same way. I suppose i just don't understand why blood lust would be restricted to the action, this is not stated in the rules.
Perhaps we just have to agree to disagree, and move on. |
|
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 05:29 |
|
Well, I look at; why is feeding part of the action?
because it is stated as being performed at the end of the action.
But also, the third sentence: On a 1... feed on a spectator. This sentence refers to the modification implied by the second sentence: 'can carry out the action as normal'. If a 2+ means that the action is normal, then a 1 means the action is not normal. And everything that follows becomes the modification to the action; and then the sentence stating 'performed at the end of the action' is only defining WHEN it happens, and is not actually what makes the feeding part of the action at all. And if that's the case, then the entire bloodlust becomes the modification of the action, NOT simply the feeding.
I'm aware this might be a seemingly overly complicated reading: but how could 'feeding' be prevented simply because of a turnover? To me, that is an overly complicated reading, and Vampires have enough issues as it is without suffering from losing players when they are also suffering a turnover. |
|
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 05:31 |
|
Finally: Why should Bloodlust be the only thing in the whole game that happens outside of an action? Everything else is part of an action.. why should Bloodlust somehow be some special 'event' that is different? |
|
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 05:42 |
|
it's not about double turnover - the turnover clause in bloodlust MUST be there so that we know that a failed feeding that is caused in 'normal' ways (block or move action) results in a turnover. Sure it's redundant if there already was a turnover, but redundancy is important.
I should probably emphasize something. I don't agree with 'bloodlust is part of the action'. I think it's probably accurate to the written rules, BUT:
Vampires are NOT overpowered. Weakening them by making them lose a player if they get a rare turnover (usually a snake eyed pick up) seems extremely harsh, and I think they should be permitted to feed after a turnover. |
|
|
The_Murker
Joined: Jan 30, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 11:19 |
|
I don't see how this is even a debate. An ACTION is something your player is trying to do. Move, pass, etc. Bloodlust was not something he was trying to do. Nor is feeding. Bloodlust is just a state he is in. Feeding is just something that will happen when his turn is over and he is next to a thrall. He does not have to "declare" he is trying to feed at the end of his move. He can not "fail" to feed. Feeding just happens if next to a thrall.
So if he causes a turn over, end of turn, feed if next to a thrall, otherwise get sent off. It's seems very very clear and I don't know why you would WANT to read the rules in any other way. I'm with Nelphine 100%.
Now, if it's a coding issue, that's all Kalimar has to say. If Kal says it stays, it stays. |
_________________
Join the wait-list. Watch the action. Leave the Empire. Come to Bretonnia! |
|
Kalimar
Joined: Sep 22, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 12:54 |
|
The only debatable case is failing a Pickup next to a Thrall. Is the vampire allowed to bite (and not being sent off) or not. All other cases are clear to me (failing a Dodge etc. - no Bite when prone). I wouldn't mind changing this in the client if we can agree. I don't think it makes vampires overpowered and still requires some careful planming (placing a thrall just so). |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 13:14 |
|
If it will be allowed to bite when failing a pickup, it should also be allowed to hypno when failing a pickup and hypno and bite when failing Tentacles. The latter 2 are in contradiction with the Galak's clarification on TFF on the mentioned matter.
Hypno is possible with similar wording than biting.
***
Some people seem to have an older version of rules at hand. The correct version is m78, not m75 for instance. |
|
|
Kalimar
Joined: Sep 22, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 13:20 |
|
Why is Hypno and Biting the same? One is an Action you do voluntarily for a benefit, the other is something you must do, when suffering Blood Lust. |
|
|
The_Murker
Joined: Jan 30, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 13:22 |
|
Hypno seems like an "action", and muddys the waters. Forget that for now.
In the case of the pick-up, I don't see how anyone can argue that the thrall can't be bitten. The bite just happens when the vamp's turn ends, and his turn clearly ends when he fails a pick-up. The bite is not a declared action that fails. You don't have to declare what thrall you are going to bite before you start moving, etc. etc. It just happens. |
_________________
Join the wait-list. Watch the action. Leave the Empire. Come to Bretonnia! |
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 13:31 |
|
Per the ruling there seems to be two different kinds of things happening "at the end of the Action": voluntary and involuntary.
Voluntary things contain at least passing the ball (p7), hand-offing the ball (p20), fouling (p23), Hypnotic Gaze (p65) and biting a Thrall per Blood Lust (p63).
Involuntary things contain at least rolling bounces (p7) for ball (and possible consequences per spiked ball), rolling armour and injury rolls (p7) and biting a spectator per Blood Lust (p63).
Voluntary things seem to have been named with wording "at the end of the Action" and involuntary things seem to have been named with "Action ends immediatly".
The ruling/clarification on TFF in my understanding claims that you do not get to do voluntary things on turnovers and other "ends immediatly", but you always have to do the involuntary things. In the third post from Galak I referred he says:
"It should be noted as well ... I also believe that successful Tentacles would not allow a Vampire to bite a Thrall and thus force him to leave the pitch. The logic is exactly the same as the logic I just stated above for Hypnotic Gaze.
Galak" |
|
|
Ehlers
Joined: Jun 26, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 14:14 |
|
CRP Rules:
Move action:
The player may move a number of squares equal to their movement allowance
You are allowed to pick up the ball during your move action
Blood Lust:
On a 2+ carry out action as normal
On a 1 carry out the following special action.
If the vampire is not able to attack a Thrall (for any reason), then he is removed from the pitch and placed in his team’s reserve. (So The Blood Lust vampire in reserve is actually able to take part on the field in next kick-off)
Special action:
May carry out a move action and loses his declared action for the turn.
During the move action the vampire can do anything else they could normally do WHILE taking a Move Action before biting a thrall (except score a touchdown, see down below)
If the original action was one that could only be used by one player on the team then it counts as having been used up for the team.
If he can’t attack an adjacent thrall he is removed from pitch and count as a turnover.
If he was holding the ball, the ball will scatter from his square and not be able to score a touchdown (even if he gets to the endzone!)
Practice of rules:
First you declare action, then you roll for Blood Lust.
If you roll a 1, then you lose your Blitz Action, Block Action, Pass Action and Foul Action. A Special Action for the Blood Lust Vampire is now taking place. Going to take this Special Action into account with each Action below:
Move Action: Lose your move action, move vampire next to a thrall or removed to reserve with turnover for team.
Blitz Action: Lose your blitz action, move vampire next to a thrall or removed to reserve with turnover for team.
Block Action: Lose your block action (no block is taking place), move vampire next to a thrall or removed to reserve with turnover for team.
Pass Action: Lose your pass action, move vampire next to a thrall or removed to reserve with turnover for team.
Foul Action: Lose your foul action, move vampire next to a thrall or removed to reserve with turnover for team.
In the case if the vampire should fail a dodge, fail a gfi, be trapped by Tentacle or otherwise be prevented from attacking a thrall, then he is removed from the pitch and turnover. So if the vampire fail a dodge action, roll on armour/injury table and then remove vampire to the reserve as he cant attack when he is prone or stunned. Also if you fail a dodge, your action ends and therefore your Special Action cant not be carried out (eg. Not be able to feed).
---
I dont play vampires myself, so have never really looked into the rules. BUT this is what the CRP rule state
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1310002_BB_Complete_Blood_Bowl_Rulebook.pdf
Go and read them. I am 100% sure that I am right. So read before you disagree with me. |
|
|
The_Murker
Joined: Jan 30, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 14:15 |
|
Whoops. Thanks for the page reference. It is very clear that a whatever a Bloodlusting vampire declared no longer matters, he can no longer Block, Blitz, Pass, Hand-Off or Foul. He may only take a Move Action. Move actions end on turn overs. Failed pick-ups are turnovers. So, Failed Pick-Up = Turn Over = End of Move Action = Bite Happens if Next to Thrall. (in my opionion) You could read NO BITE HAPPENS if you really wanted to, but why?
But honestly, if the client allows Vamps to take non-MOVE actions when lusting the rules aren't correct anyway, so it dosn't really matter. (forgive me if the client is correct, I haven't played against vamps in a while) |
_________________
Join the wait-list. Watch the action. Leave the Empire. Come to Bretonnia! |
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2012 - 14:17 |
|
That is a wrong version of the rules. Correct version is m780049a_Blood_Bowl_Competition_Rules. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Making Assassins mor...
Search
