NAF World Headquarters :: View topic - Using team re-roll to re-roll 2nd failed doge.

NAF World Headquarters

Rules Questions - Using team re-roll to re-roll 2nd failed doge.

Puckohue - May 17, 2003 - 02:31 AM
Post subject: Using team re-roll to re-roll 2nd failed doge.

According to the wording of the LRB, pages 15 and 34, "...the player may only re-roll one failed Dodge roll per team turn."

This means that if my Gutter Runner with Dodge skill fails a dodge roll, uses the skill to re-roll and succeeds, then tries to dodge another time and fails - I can't use a team re-roll.

I think the wording ought to be changed in the LRB as I'm sure it should say "...only re-roll one failed Dodge roll per team turn using the Dodge skill."

Cheers

Doubleskulls - May 17, 2003 - 05:21 AM
Post subject:

You just can't use the dodge skill again. You can use a TRR.

Puckohue - May 17, 2003 - 06:29 AM
Post subject:

Yeah, as I said.

But according to the current wording in the LRB you can't use a TRR nor a Pro, Leader or Trophy re-roll.

GalakStarscraper - May 17, 2003 - 07:07 AM
Post subject:

Puckohue wrote:

Yeah, as I said.

But according to the current wording in the LRB you can't use a TRR nor a Pro, Leader or Trophy re-roll.

Disagree for the following reason. This wording is in the description of the Dodge skill. So that means it is describing the Dodge skill. The fact that page 9 says nothing what so ever about only one per a turn being rerolled.

The placement of that wording should make it obvious that it refers to the use of the Dodge skill without having to say "using the Dodge skill".

Basically that would be like saying in a cook book under the section title: "Turning on the oven" ... First, turn on the oven.

Galak

Puckohue - May 17, 2003 - 11:50 AM
Post subject:

Yeah, I agree. But the majority in my league don't.

Darkson - May 18, 2003 - 12:56 AM
Post subject:

Well, tell the majority of your league they're wrong Wink

Puckohue - May 18, 2003 - 02:26 AM
Post subject:

Quote:

Well, tell the majority of your league they're wrong

I tried.

I still think the wording ought to be changed, in order to avoid this.

It would be better if it said "...only re-roll one failed Dodge roll per team turn using the Dodge skill."

Or why not delete the sentence as we all know a player can't use a skill more than once during a turn?

skummy - May 19, 2003 - 08:55 AM
Post subject:

Darkson is correct, and I really don't know what else to say there to convince your league. It's just the way the game is played.

After reading several posts of these types, I think that the BRCC really needs to have a Q&A person for these sort of non-rules changing answers. Giving someone the authority to answer the common rules clarifications, but not make changes would probably help everyone out. Debating established rules would end, and it would keep the Hot List short and sweet.

GalakStarscraper - May 19, 2003 - 09:05 AM
Post subject:

skummy wrote:

Actually Skummy the only things that go on the Hot List are the questions that I agree could be read more than one way.

In this case .... this is definitely not a Hot List item. The LRB is clear. The fact that his league doesn't want to believe the LRB is the league's problem ... not the LRB's.

Trust me ... I try to keep the Hot List as short as possible.

And an offical Q&A person ... would not be a good idea.

Babs within the last year ruled that the LRB was not an official source for the rules and anything in it was House Rules only until it was actually printed on real paper.

JKL within the last year ruled in a tournament you could choose not to use the Frenzy skill when you block and thus avoid any second blocks which would be against the player.

Do you really trust any one person to be the OFFICIAL Q&A person ... I don't. The reason there are 7 of them is so that when one goes off in left field at least 4 others ... can yank them back in.

Princeofcats disagreed with me greatly on this on the BB forum ... but Blood Bowl is just one of those games where the rules are better handled by committee than single source in my opinion.

Galak

skummy - May 19, 2003 - 09:14 AM
Post subject:

I just wish there was a way to avoid debating back and forth on a well established issue. Any one person can of course make a mistake, but I'd like to see a way to get some of these easier answers confirmed quickly.

Agentrock - May 19, 2003 - 09:20 AM
Post subject:

I agree with Skummy on his point above, but Galak's reasoning is well proven too. I usually try to see what the majority rules on in questions...but sometimes this isn't "quickly"....

GalakStarscraper - May 19, 2003 - 12:16 PM
Post subject:

skummy wrote:

I've found that there are a couple folks that post that are right about 95% of the time to rules answers. My experience ... trust them if they post unless a BBRC member later overrules.

Folks like AnthonyTBBF or Deathwing come to mind ... probably have it right if they post an answer.

Galak

Dave - May 19, 2003 - 01:15 PM
Post subject:

Zombie ??? Wink

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Bevan - May 19, 2003 - 05:03 PM
Post subject: Q 7 Q committee

GalakStarscraper wrote:

Do you really trust any one person to be the OFFICIAL Q&A person ... I don't. The reason there are 7 of them is so that when one goes off in left field at least 4 others ... can yank them back in.

Princeofcats disagreed with me greatly on this on the BB forum ... but Blood Bowl is just one of those games where the rules are better handled by committee than single source in my opinion.

Galak

It would be useful to have a Q&A run by the BBRC comittee. If several posters here show that a rule is unclear, but most agree on the way it should be played then a Q&A can fix it quickly without changing the rules. This would be better than waiting for an annual update on something we all agree is unclear in the LRB.

Would it be possible for the BBRC to e-mail each other suggested Q&A items and if they all agree that the interpretation is correct then there could be a monthly update to the official Q&A.

Indigo - May 20, 2003 - 04:03 AM
Post subject:

the only drawback to that I can see is that the BBRC have real lives, and something like that could easily get out of hand. Far better to leave it to the annual rules debate and get them sorted out in one go. If you want to change a rule, make it a house rule if everyone is in agreement.

GalakStarscraper - May 20, 2003 - 08:17 AM
Post subject:

I agree with Indigo. Bevan this is better left to the Hot List to BBRC Annual discussion as we currently have it.

I really prefer annual organized discussion to random rulings.

Galak