28 coaches online • Server time: 03:54
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Hourly box activatio...goto Post POLL: Greatest Big G...goto Post FUMBBL Cup XVI: Pick...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 24, 2015 - 17:46
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

The full Rules Changes pdf as mentioned on page 18 of the forum can be found Here. This is independent of the below changes, and is a full complete rules document.

The most up to date version of my LRB7 on FUMBBL, now including colour coded rules changes, can be found here: LRB7 Up-to-date



There's been a bit of discussion on the forums recently about BB rosters and how you'd change them. It was Amazons recently, and a few months ago it was Norse. The discussion on Human Catchers always comes up.

Plasmoid released what was called the Narrow Tier Blood Bowl (NTBB) roster changes. Those can be found here. I'm not a big fan of them personally.

I thought it might be a fun exercise to re-do all the rosters myself, and also provide scope for other people to do the same.

I've created 3 public notes pages:
-The first is just all of the current BB rosters transposed into the format I used. It gives an idea of what it's meant to look like, and someone might find it useful as a tool. Please let me know if I'm made any errors in this. CRP Rosters

-The second is a template of the above with a comments section below each team, and shown as BB code so people can copy/paste it and create their own. Copy the lot, or just a single team. All the slashes breaking up the sections seem to have been lost in the BB code view, so note that each new team block start after the
Code:
[i]Changes and Reasoning[/i][/block][/block]
of the previous block. Template

- Finally, there's the changes that I'd like to try out. I did each roster in turn. Not all changed, but most had minor adjustments. A big general change was removing Loner from all rostered players (Big guys). It will be the purview of only journeymen from now on. I assumed no rules changes from standard CRP when creating these. My LRB7


Feel free to use this thread to comment on my changes, or post your own, or both. Or just borrow the template for League pages with roster restriction (I'll be using it on the next update of the Grind page).

Cheers and have fun.
Josh


Edit: I've changed the name to My LRB7 on the advice of Koadah. It's still only roster changes though. I haven't included any rules changes.


Last edited by mister__joshua on Jul 12, 2017 - 13:34; edited 14 times in total
The_Great_Gobbo



Joined: Aug 04, 2014

Post   Posted: Jun 24, 2015 - 17:58 Reply with quote Back to top

Me likes!
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 24, 2015 - 21:58
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Thanks. The team ideas or the template? I'm hoping someone will find it useful at least Smile

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 24, 2015 - 23:16 Reply with quote Back to top

Zons - I like

Big guys losing loner I don't like

M access on doubles only.....I'm not sure, it will kill off some skills. Mutations need to be 2 tier, like old traits in my opinion

Dwarf losing tackle, ok, gaining stand firm could be a nightmare to play against. However need a name change to lineman I feel if they lose a skill. I would like to then see a longbeard or blocker positional. You've called them longbeards, is this intentional or did you forget they're called blockers now?

CDs losing mutations I don't like. Hmmmmm yes and no on the theme. Old CDs did mutate, the big hat crew...yes you're right they didn't.

Pact changes are very interesting, I'd be interested to see how they play. I'd have kept the animosity.

Darkies - Yup fine. You've given assassins S access instead of A. I presume that's a typo.

Humans - If catchers are to be fixed, I think just make all catchers AG4. They were in 2nd ed, so fluff fits and it's not going to break either teams that has ag3 catchers. It's nice and tidy, and is also an alternative fix for your zons.

Khemri - Interesting, again I'd like to see how they play. My hunch though is not very well. However, you may have brought back the old foul every turn Khemri, which isn't a bad thing. Like to see how they play before making black and white comments.

Norse - As a big fan of lrb 4 Norse, shame to see the thrower go. Runners I dislike at the moment, as there role is pretty vague. Norse being a catcher replacement. DE being a thrower replacement. I'd like to see that tidied up. Your change makes them a little bit more intuitive, so that's positive. 4 Ulfs......I think I'd have gone for 3 blitzers maybe. As they used to get 4, and I'm an advocated (dare I say it, my idea) to have odd number positionals.

Nurgle - same as Chaos.

Ogres - A big no for me. Firstly, I'd like the team still tied to the Oldheim Ogres rather than Warhammer Ogres, so it has to be Goblins in my opinion. I'm against the big guy loss of Loner, so this affects them too. Gnoblars aren't an ST1 creature for me, so I'm anti that too. Also 0-11 I like in that it's an odd number, but too many. So this roster I am very anti.

Orc blitzer increase. Of course!

Slann blitzer decrease, yes I like in theory. See how it would pan out in testing before confirming approval though.

Undead - hmmmm now we have 2 different types of skeleton. Not a fan of that. It might be fixed with fluff and name changes, it might not. For me a bit of a problem.

Vamps - I can't remember the reason for the expensive rerolls and I don't have any of my books with me. Generally they lack discipline (hence the biting), thus the expensive rerolls. I'd consult Garion on this one.

Woodies - I didn't like the added sprint. I feel that a lot of lrb 5 player changes really messed with player description (runners being an example). So yeah in theory I like it. They are faster than other elven races. I'm not sure more catchers would see play though.

Conclusion, yeah it's well thought out, and I like a lot of the changes (more than I don't like)

However I think some of the core changes you've made are problematic. Loss of loner I don't like. My fix for them is that only ST5 guys can take PO. This would give Big guys a niche. Losing loner, just makes them to reliable and powerful.

Mutations again, I think could be a problem. Mutations as a whole need totally re-evaluating.

And the skeleton.....I'd like for them to match.
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 24, 2015 - 23:43 Reply with quote Back to top

The Vamps rerolls at 70 is stupid though given that they need like 4 of them to be somewhat reliable. Every other 70k reroll team has tools in place that are contra to the need to reroll -either inherently skilled or inherently strong players.
fidius



Joined: Jun 17, 2011

Post   Posted: Jun 24, 2015 - 23:54 Reply with quote Back to top

Love the formatting, very nice BBcode work, lots of effort, nicely done.

I like the Orc and Vamp changes.
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 00:17
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Thanks for the feedback chaps. I'm hoping people find the format and template useful, and hope someone will post their own changes! Very Happy

@harvestmouse:
The S access on the dark elf was a typo (and was present on all 3 notes). As was the 0-4 Ulfs for norse. They're copy/paste errors. Apologies. The Dwarfs being called Longbeards was also just a mistake.

I agree that I dislike the 'runner' positional being a bit of a mess. I considered trying to unify them but weren't sure A access worked on the Dwarf one. I also considered S access for all blitzers, but decided against it.

The removing of Loner I was quite pleased with. I have 2 problems with it. The only people that have it also have another negatrait so they are all punished twice. I feel bonehead, WA and RS etc. are strong enough without adding Loner in too. Also the skill Loner is meant to represent people not used to playing with the team so ideal for Journeymen but a bit crap for players who play every week. I'd be happy to keep Loner if the option was there to remove it as a 'double' skill roll. The same for the M access. I'd be fine with greater M access if it worked like traits, but for the purpose of the exercise I was assuming no changes to the rules.

Ogres I'm happy to change. Of all the races they were the ones I had least idea about, apart from wanting them to be 0-11. I don't know a lot about their history in BB tbh

The skeletons I'm fine with unifying. I think I put that in the Undead comments section too. I weren't sure if 30k skellies would be too good on Undead, but probably they'd be fine and I agree unifying positionals should be done if possible.

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
DrPoods



Joined: Nov 14, 2013

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 00:19 Reply with quote Back to top

I would argue that High Elves, being traditionally the "hold the line" elves could do with switching a bit with the Dark Elves, who are more "hit and run". Dark Elves 0-2 Blitzers, 0-4 Runners maybe? High Elves to go 0-4 Blitzers, 0-2 catchers.

Just a thought.

_________________
"I gotta fever and the only prescription is MOAR COWBELL!!"
"That's right... shop smart: shop S-Mart... You got that?"
Wreckage



Joined: Aug 15, 2004

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 00:34 Reply with quote Back to top

The original NTBB is not perfect but hands down pretty much the best approach to change the rules so far.

If those changes would get official that would certainly be a good thing.
Calcium



Joined: Apr 08, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 00:46 Reply with quote Back to top

I like this! With HM on loner, big guys would be gold without it

_________________
Image
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 00:47
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Wreckage wrote:
The original NTBB is not perfect but hands down pretty much the best approach to change the rules so far.

If those changes would get official that would certainly be a good thing.


I'm not a big fan of some. I think the Mummy and Wardancer changes were a bit crap. I liked the Slann Blitzer change, and the Amazon lino which I included in my run through. The others are ok, can take or leave them.
Matthueycamo



Joined: May 16, 2014

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 00:54 Reply with quote Back to top

I like the idea of 11 Ogres, but isn't that just too much strength? There needs to be something to balance it out.

_________________
Image

DLE College 7s
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 01:04
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Calcium wrote:
I like this! With HM on loner, big guys would be gold without it


Big guys should be gold though, in my opinion. Who wouldn't want to field a Minotaur or an Ogre? The rules make them a liability, but the fluff makes them awesome. I think they should be the latter Razz
fidius



Joined: Jun 17, 2011

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 01:06 Reply with quote Back to top

Wreckage wrote:
The original NTBB is not perfect but hands down pretty much the best approach to change the rules so far.

If those changes would get official that would certainly be a good thing.


Ugh, no.
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 25, 2015 - 01:09 Reply with quote Back to top

Regarding the runners, what about if they were all 'make shift' throwers? So they all come with pass access. You then have to decide whether to remove the A access off of the Norse runner. Either they keep it, or they lose it and up the berserker allowance. If you had 3 or even 4 bersekers this would mean you would have 6 or 7 S access frenzy players. It's too much really, so not a massive boost. Makes the Khorne roster a bit redundant though.

Ogres, I'd just give them gobbos back and leave the ogres at 0-6. See how they get on with that for a while.

Positive of 30k skellies would bring back more of a difference between skellies and zombies. Right now they're a bit too samey.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Powered by PNphpBB2 1.2 © 2003 PNphpBB Group
Credits