NAF World Headquarters :: View topic - Buzzing and Interceptions

NAF World Headquarters

Rules Questions - Buzzing and Interceptions

Doubleskulls - Apr 23, 2004 - 08:38 AM
Post subject: Buzzing and Interceptions

Buzzing "... will automatically fail any attempt to pick up or catch the ball."

So how does this effect interceptions?

Can I even try?
If I try do I automatically fail - so the ball passes safely over my head?
Or can I roll, and if I make it, the ball scatter from the square I'm in?

This came up during a FUMBBL game, and I think Ski's got it right in that you effectively can't attempt the interception.

Aramil - Apr 23, 2004 - 09:09 AM
Post subject:

Since you can use the "Catch" skill in order to re-roll an interception, we can understand that an interception is a catch-action.
Starting from that I would say that you can try to intercept with that player, but the result is in every case a 1, so the ball will pass over your head without being touched.

My 2 cents... Smile

Doubleskulls - Apr 23, 2004 - 10:46 AM
Post subject:

Yep, I'd agree with that. I wonder what the BBRC think though?

Narkotic - Apr 26, 2004 - 04:50 AM
Post subject:

Doubleskulls posted the same question on TBB and a longer discussion arose about that.

I was the same opinion as Aramil until Galak posted that:

1) interception is not a catch-roll

2) the buzzing player may try to intercept but the ball scatters form his square if he should be sucessfull

I'm still thinking about that but can't get it right, it contradicts the FAQ that NoS can be used for interceptions IMHO.

Aramil - Apr 26, 2004 - 06:45 AM
Post subject:

Narkotic wrote:

I was the same opinion as Aramil until Galak posted that:

If Galak said that, I just raise my hands and shut up... never contradict Mr. Blood-Bowl.net! Laughing

Zombie - Apr 26, 2004 - 03:32 PM
Post subject:

Well, i do contradict Galak, and in this case i think he's wrong.

Apedog - Apr 26, 2004 - 03:34 PM
Post subject:

I would say that Galak is right according to the letter of the rules, an interception is clearly not a catch and vice versa.

The NOS ruling I would think is due to the intention in the rules. For a lot of the time interceptions seem to be treated as catches so I guess maybe the intention was always that NOS should be used for an int.

I would rule that the Buzzing player should not be allowed to int as it seems clear that he's not interested in the ball and that was the intention behind the rule but thats not how the rule is written and so would be a change/clarification rather than technically correct IMO.

Zombie - Apr 26, 2004 - 03:45 PM
Post subject:

Apedog wrote:

I would say that Galak is right according to the letter of the rules, an interception is clearly not a catch and vice versa.

According to the letter of the rule, an interception IS a catch. So is catching a bouncing ball. That's why you can use the catch skill on both!

SBG - Apr 27, 2004 - 08:25 AM
Post subject:

I have to agree with Zombie here: if it's not a catch action, how come NoS and Catch apply?

Fred

Mestari - Apr 28, 2004 - 04:57 AM
Post subject:

Galaks interpretation would seem like a house rule to me, and automatically failing the interception roll would be in line with the other rules (such as the use of catch-skill) concerning this issue.

mtn_bike - Apr 28, 2004 - 07:16 AM
Post subject:

I'm mixed on this one.

SBG wrote:

I have to agree with Zombie here: if it's not a catch action, how come NoS and Catch apply?

Fred

I think the same reason you can use the dodge skill when being blocked.

Though in the real world you catch an interception this just may be a game mechanic. I read and reread Interceptions in the current LRB P22 and it only says you roll for interception. When succesful you place the ball on the players base to show that they caught the ball. At which point I guess it would scatter.

Personally I would have ruled the buzzing player can make no attempt to intercept the ball.

Zombie - Apr 28, 2004 - 10:15 AM
Post subject:

Wrong. Dodge has two uses according to the rules. Catch has only only : rerolling a catch. The fact that interceptions and catching boucing balls are catch rolls should not even be disputed.

GalakStarscraper - Apr 28, 2004 - 05:34 PM
Post subject:

Okay here's my deal.

Interception is not meant to be the same as catch IMO

Very Long Legs and Extra Arms work on one but not the other.

An interception is worth SPPs ... a Catch is not.

The above is the basis for my belief that they are not the same.

The easy solution here is to clarify Buzzing in the LRB and to include the word interceptions in the LRB 3.0 for Nerves of Steel.

IE have any skill that references a Catch roll specific Interception or not with it ... then there is no question of what effects what.

Galak

GalakStarscraper - Apr 28, 2004 - 05:36 PM
Post subject:

Zombie wrote:

Apedog wrote:

I would say that Galak is right according to the letter of the rules, an interception is clearly not a catch and vice versa.

According to the letter of the rule, an interception IS a catch. So is catching a bouncing ball. That's why you can use the catch skill on both!

Actually Zombie Catch can be used on an interception because the skill Catch says it can. Not because an interception is a Catch roll.

Galak

Zombie - Apr 28, 2004 - 06:45 PM
Post subject:

GalakStarscraper wrote:

Very Long Legs and Extra Arms work on one but not the other.

IMO extra arms can be used on interceptions and scattering balls. In fact, it has been suggested before that very long legs + extra arms make for a pretty potent intercepting combo.

Doubleskulls - Apr 29, 2004 - 02:34 AM
Post subject:

Zombie wrote:

GalakStarscraper wrote:

Very Long Legs and Extra Arms work on one but not the other.

IMO extra arms can be used on interceptions and scattering balls. In fact, it has been suggested before that very long legs + extra arms make for a pretty potent intercepting combo.

LRB pp35 "A player with one or more extra arms may add +1 to all his
Catch rolls. This trait does not work on interception attempts."

pp34 "A player who has the Catch skill is allowed to re-roll the dice if he fails to catch the ball. It also allows the player to re-roll the dice if he drops a hand-off or fails to make an interception."

Bouncing balls is dealt with in the same section as catch - and talks about catching the ball - so catch should worth there too.

Zombie - Apr 29, 2004 - 03:40 AM
Post subject:

Doubleskulls wrote:

LRB pp35 "A player with one or more extra arms may add +1 to all his Catch rolls. This trait does not work on interception attempts."

When was this changed? In my Death Zone playbook, this sentence isn't there. In the LRB 1.3, it's there but not in blue (all changes are supposed to be in blue). Another rule slipped in without telling us?

Narkotic - Apr 29, 2004 - 05:02 AM
Post subject:

??I thought that it was that way all the time, but I haven't played 3rd ed much TBH.

I really don't know why an interception is ruled out for extra arms? This mutation is horribly weak, why make it even more worthless? It should work for interceptions as well. I even would opt for extra arms players that they may ignore the minus mod of one adjacent tackle zone while catching/intercepting.

Back to topic: ok, somehow catch and interception are different things but this has been proved by deductive means, it would really be a lot clearer to say that every dice roll where you want to grap/receive/catch/handed-off the ball is a catch roll. Include the -2 mod for interceptions in the catch mod table.

This solution would annihilate a lot of extra sentences (xx does work for interceptions, xx does not work for interceptions etc), really wouldn't change the gameplay and would get rid of a some annoying and ever repeating rules-questions. BTW this would be the understanding most coaches intuitively would refer to an interception.

GalakStarscraper - Apr 29, 2004 - 05:28 AM
Post subject:

Zombie wrote:

If it was then its one that has now been on the books for 2 years and no one noticed or cared.

I don't look at the old books anymore Zombie unless I'm trying to prove how long a "new" rule has been in the books. So now does my ruling on Buzzing make a little more sense?

By the way ... before we beat this to death ... I fixed the wording of NoS and Buzzing in the LRB 3.0 to solve this problem and the LRB 3.0 is now up on the website making it the new rulebook to argue from ... Laughing

Galak

Mestari - Apr 29, 2004 - 05:37 AM
Post subject:

Well, I suppose it's kind of pointless to argue with a guy who actually can change the rules Wink

On the whole, I suppose no-one really has any strong feelings about this one, and I think most of the people will be happy as long as single, correct interpretation is readily available. At least I am.

GalakStarscraper - Apr 29, 2004 - 07:07 AM
Post subject:

Mestari wrote:

Well, I suppose it's kind of pointless to argue with a guy who actually can change the rules Wink

Yeah but I didn't change them to match my ruling ... my ruling was based on the text of the LRB 2.0. But I fully agreed that the intent of NoS was for it to work on interceptions and for Buzzing players to not be able to intercept. So I fixed the wording to make it clear the intent ... not the way the LRB 2.0 reads.

IE ... no rule changes here ... just cleaning up vagueness as we find it.

Galak

Zombie - Apr 29, 2004 - 11:48 AM
Post subject:

I don't know. In LRB1 and LRB2, it specifically says that extra arms doesn't work on interception. This to me says that it would work if not stated, otherwise stating that in the skill description is a waste of space. This means that interceptions are, and always have been, catch rolls.

Anyway, it doesn't change anything now since it seems that you made the LRB3 to match my view anyway!

GalakStarscraper - Apr 29, 2004 - 01:21 PM
Post subject:

Zombie wrote:

Anyway, it doesn't change anything now since it seems that you made the LRB3 to match my view anyway!

Yup I'm just mostly BBRC evil ... not all the way BBRC evil yet l guess ... Twisted Evil

Galak