NAF World Headquarters
Rules Questions - PBBL 1.10 is now posted at Specialist Games
GalakStarscraper - Oct 12, 2005 - 07:54 AM
Post subject: PBBL 1.10 is now posted at Specialist Games
The latest copy of the PBBL rules have been posted. This version will stay unchanged until the February 2006 discussion for 1.11. It should be noted that the PBBL process is winding down ... the expectation is that very little will be change with the 1.11 version:
Website:
http://www.specialist-games.com/bloodbowl/vault.asp
Direct links to materials:
http://www.specialist-games.com/assets/PBBL_110.pdf
http://www.specialist-games.com/assets/PBBL_Roster_Front.pdf
===========================================
My biggest request to everyone is this. Whether you like the idea or not, these will most likely become the new rules in 2007. If for some reason the boxed set idea falls through (which I have no reason to believe it will at this time), its very likely that a BBRC rules review would be held in October of 2007 to officially make this this rule set the LRB 5.0. So what I ask ... I'd love for anyone who is willing help to make sure we found the typos, that rules are clear, that all the things that have plagued BB rulebooks in the past are as fixed as possible. Anyone willing to assist with that ... thank you in advance.
If you find errors, feel free to post them to this thread and I'll fix them for 1.11. If you have questions on a rule that confuses you, please ask so we can either point you to the clarification or fix it (just fixed Shadowing last night from this type of feedback to make it more clear).
Again thanks again to anyone willing to give PBBL 1.10 a look over to help us get it really scrubbed for final production.
===========================================
For those that aren't aware ... some stats so far on the PBBL project:
1) 19 1/2 months of discussion and playtesting since started.
2) 17 months of public access to the discussion for any BB coach to contribute and post playtesting results.
3) Over 6,000 words of new material have been developed so far either as rule changes, additional Did You Knows, or background information on Blood Bowl.
A major project if ever there was one.
On a final note ... I really do appreciate everyone whose help has gotten the project this far and for all the folks that have already volunteered to help that had previously not been involved to look over 1.10 and make sure its as clean as possible.
Galak
Aramil - Oct 12, 2005 - 08:32 AM
Post subject:
I've been a great enemy of the vault since the start... but after long reading of vault 1.9 and 1.10 I have to make my compliments to you, Galak, and all the others that are helping you in creating this rulebook: there are a lot of interesting ideas and now I finally see that those rules can be an improvement and not a big step back as I was thinking in the past.
Me and the rest of the Bologna guys will from now on become playtesters and supporters... and I'll send you soon an e-mail with our opinions and suggestions 
Many kudos to you! 
biggy - Oct 12, 2005 - 06:37 PM
Post subject:
I assume that Brick Fa'rth and grotty are intended to provide a use for the now defunct ogre thrower figure and the goblin that comes with IT??
Andrew
GalakStarscraper - Oct 13, 2005 - 06:49 AM
Post subject:
ABigwood wrote:
I assume that Brick Fa'rth and grotty are intended to provide a use for the now defunct ogre thrower figure and the goblin that comes with IT??
Correct
Galak
Da_Scum - Mar 21, 2006 - 12:07 PM
Post subject:
This is what happens when real life comes a knocking.... 
I agree, I had my doubts with the Vault for a long time and all the problems in there. This seems to be going more BACK in the good direction of not throwing out what did work while making some fair tweaks here and there. I may just have to try a league with them some time...
Though the Secret Weapons part has me scratching my head...it's become a "What's the point?" now if they automatically go "Poof!" after just the one drive! 
All they are now are a waste of money to any serious Goblin coach if they actually plan on being a competative team rather than a joke one. Might as well just tell other teams they automatically have to bench their Blitzers or Gutter Runners after only one drive! 
At least before they had the great balance of going "disasterously wrong" and getting ejected to offset what advantages they MAY give in a game, and no guarantee they'd stick around anyway. Now? Like I said what's the point wasting money on them, ESPECIALLY in a tournament setting where every Gold Crown is vital in building team! (Again see telling the other team they have to bench their Blitzers after a drive.) Might as well tell the Goblin coach to flush the money at the pub instead as they'll get far more use out of it!
At least there's a year to get this adjusted. 
alternat - Mar 22, 2006 - 08:42 AM
Post subject:
I would not compare a Goblin pogoer or fanatic to a Gutter Runner... not at all.
A Goblin team must rely on common players, not on weird chaps wielding some weird weapons that most of the time is going to hurt his fellows as well (or maybe more) than the opponents.
Fanatics most of the times don't hit anyone, spending their time spinning around while all other players step around them easily.
Loonies have one-in-six chance of hurting themselves very, very bad.
Bombardiers most often die by a fumble...
Don't forget that you'll be the underdog most of the times, and you can spend Inducement money in bribes.
Curious, anyway, how people tend to focus on a single rule, sticking their attention and their complaint on that only, forgetting all the rest (who said Norse?)...
Da_Scum - Mar 22, 2006 - 12:57 PM
Post subject:
alternat wrote:
I would not compare a Goblin pogoer or fanatic to a Gutter Runner... not at all.
I wouldn't normally either, I've seen their eating habits. It's not pretty.
alternat wrote:
A Goblin team must rely on common players, not on weird chaps wielding some weird weapons that most of the time is going to hurt his fellows as well (or maybe more) than the opponents.
All he HAS is common players! Which funny enough I do with VERY well in tournaments. But having spent the money on something I expect it to at least have the chance to have an impact on the game...much like the Blitzers and Gutter Runners...rather than have it automatic they go "Poof!" now. Tournaments have shown that the Weapons aren't that big of a swing, in fact the Goblin Team that depends on them tends to have it backfire, a lot! This is now putting me in position of the skaven Team with Thrud....
alternat wrote:
Fanatics most of the times don't hit anyone, spending their time spinning around while all other players step around them easily.
Loonies have one-in-six chance of hurting themselves very, very bad.
Bombardiers most often die by a fumble...
In short they self-correct and balance themselves...so why tilt it to far the other way?
alternat wrote:
Don't forget that you'll be the underdog most of the times, and you can spend Inducement money in bribes.
Which won't apply in any NAF tournaments...so this suddenly becomes an unbalance rather than an ability TO balance. Sure in League play I MIGHT think about getting one...and only one as it appears they get skill points now. But in a tournament, balance is broken. It's like was discussed at a Gencon Bowl and Spike! a year ago that we're starting to look at TWO sets of rules being required. One for League, one for Tournaments...in order for there to be balance. Somehow I think this was what we wanted to avoid.
alternat wrote:
Curious, anyway, how people tend to focus on a single rule, sticking their attention and their complaint on that only, forgetting all the rest (who said Norse?)...
Oh haven't tested the rest yet to have grounds for it. This one though DID get some testing of late and it's why the fault/complaint has come up. Otherwise more than happy to point out what works/doesn't work! 
Like Loner skill, interesting addition. But hands down if the player ever has/gets Pro will use that instead of the Loner which risks burning the Reroll out anyway.
Mordredd - Mar 23, 2006 - 05:08 PM
Post subject:
The on roster weapons are very cheap, e.g. 40k for a chainsaw. Even if it only lasts a drive that seems like a pretty reasonable deal to me. You can a lot of damage with them, especially to low AV teams. The weapon stars are pretty cheap too.
Da_Scum wrote:
At least there's a year to get this adjusted.
Not even close. You got until June/July.
Da_Scum - Mar 23, 2006 - 08:41 PM
Post subject:
Mordredd wrote:
The on roster weapons are very cheap, e.g. 40k for a chainsaw. Even if it only lasts a drive that seems like a pretty reasonable deal to me. You can a lot of damage with them, especially to low AV teams. The weapon stars are pretty cheap too.
Da_Scum wrote:
At least there's a year to get this adjusted.
Not even close. You got until June/July.
On roster I'll admit I find it interesting for LEAGUE play...though that's going to take even more crunching and running through the works to get a real picture besides the one the tournament environment is already giving. The chainsaw being cheap seems to be the balance to it being a 50/50 shot to even start...and if you're serious on scoring the drive won't last anyway on average. The Ball'n'Chain seems to also fit into that catagory of huge expediture for a hoped quick bang. And with them getting skills now it could get REAL interesting. But that's League play. Come Tournament play they become a problem at the cost for the "only one drive guarantee, if that".
Now if the tournament let's me "mix 'n' match", i.e. both the Stars AND the Roster... My instincts tell me it now goes balance tilting the OTHER way...
I'm going to crutch that in on-line and other local play the next few weeks when I have the time. Might come in handy come next Gencon Bowl.
slup - Mar 24, 2006 - 03:37 AM
Post subject:
Note Chainsaws does not require an AG-roll to start in PBBL, they work from drive 1.
Most secret weapons has been completely rewritten.
The bombs have also been improved (no roll to light the fuse).
They are available in the skill-section of the PBBL-rules.
Notorious_jtb - Mar 31, 2006 - 08:31 AM
Post subject:
Hi,
just noticed that PBBL 1.11 is up on the specialist games site, and its huge 84 pages and 8 MB and i have been having problems downloading it. Just wondered if anyone else did?
cheers
joe
Wosret - Apr 15, 2006 - 10:24 AM
Post subject:
Notorious_jtb wrote:
Hi,
just noticed that PBBL 1.11 is up on the specialist games site, and its huge 84 pages and 8 MB and i have been having problems downloading it. Just wondered if anyone else did?
cheers
joe
If u think that's big try the Mordheim living rulebook at 22 MB
Oh and no probs dl'ing here
Gremdel_BB - Apr 15, 2006 - 01:51 PM
Post subject:
We've started a league that is using the new rules:
http://gremdel.awardspace.com/index.php (sometimes doesn't work, guess you get what you pay for.)
We mostly like the new rules, especially the new handicap system. I noticed what I think may be a typo when I was looking for a point system to use for our league:
From page 40:
Quote:
Finally, you can decide to run the regular season as a league
with scheduled matches (like the FA Soccer League in the UK).
Teams score points depending on how well they do in matches
(typically 3 for a win, 1 for a draw and 1 for a loss, though 5 for a
win, 3 for a draw, and 1 for a loss is a popular alternative).
Excuse me, I'm a baseball loving American, but shouldn't that be 3 for a win, 1 for a draw, and 0 for a loss?
Paul - Apr 15, 2006 - 05:37 PM
Post subject:
Gremdel_BB wrote:
We've started a league that is using the new rules:
http://gremdel.awardspace.com/index.php (sometimes doesn't work, guess you get what you pay for.)
We mostly like the new rules, especially the new handicap system. I noticed what I think may be a typo when I was looking for a point system to use for our league:
From page 40:
Quote:
Finally, you can decide to run the regular season as a league
with scheduled matches (like the FA Soccer League in the UK).
Teams score points depending on how well they do in matches
(typically 3 for a win, 1 for a draw and 1 for a loss, though 5 for a
win, 3 for a draw, and 1 for a loss is a popular alternative).
Excuse me, I'm a baseball loving American, but shouldn't that be 3 for a win, 1 for a draw, and 0 for a loss?
I think it should be. You usually get nothing for a loss, unless its a hockey game and you loose in OT