| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Feb 26, 2004 - 11:49 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
When Brian Horton made the 3rd ed Oberwald and Gary Moriarty and i helped him, we had to research what leagues around the world were using so we could document all the most often used house rules. There are many who use it all right.
You're right, there are more people who play the official way. But that will always be true of any rule, no matter how dumb it is. Still, this is one of the most popular house rules around, along with fumbles on a natural 1 or being unaffected by pass ranges, and a few others. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
mikeyc222 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 26, 2004 - 12:47 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Posts: 180
Status: Offline
|
|
OK, fine. but how old is the 3rd ed oberwald? if it is as old as 3rd ed then give it a rest as no one wants to look at 10 year old data.
btw, if the majority play it the way it is written and have no problem with it why should the rule be changed to satify the admitted minority? |
_________________
Because everything in life is just another Dumb Distraction!
http://www.dumbdistraction.com
Free the West Memphis 3!
http://www.wm3.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 26, 2004 - 04:08 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
If memory serves, the earliest version we worked on was around 98 or 99.
If you should always follow the majority, no rule would ever get changed. You'll never have 50% of the coaches worldwide using a house rule, no matter how good it is, because it's a house rule. Even Sigurd's back in 3rd ed wasn't used by 50% of the leagues worldwide. Every single rule change brought since the creation of the BBRC was used by less than 50% of the leagues in the world before becoming official. By your argument, none of them should ever have become an official rule since it was only a minority of people who played with them. |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
mikeyc222 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 26, 2004 - 08:15 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Posts: 180
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 26, 2004 - 08:22 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| One could also argue with the same logic that without changes (each and every one of them making official a rule that was used only by a minority), we would still be playing, 3rd, 2nd or even 1st ed. Would that be fine with you? |
_________________
They will slowly add bits of the vault in on each RR leading up to 2007, starting with LRB 4.0, so it will be a slow and agonising death for BB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
mikeyc222 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 07:44 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Posts: 180
Status: Offline
|
|
well, i can't comment on 1st or 2nd ed since i didn't play back than and have never sat down to read the rules but in most cases, i would be fine with still playing 3rd ed.
look, you OBVIOUSLY are convinced you're right and everyone else is an idiot for not agreeing, and everyone else(and that seems to include a few members of the BBRC though i may be wrong) is OBVIOUSLY convinced that you're not right. house rule it for yourself and let it freakin go already. i know you love to stand on your soapbox and preach but honestly, no one(other than you and about 5 other people that i have actually seen) really cares about the passing sequence. and that's probably the sole reason it won't get changed, because it's not a big enough issue for anyone but a few nitpickers to even care about.
deal with it(which it would seem that you have by houseruling). |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 08:21 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
I care a bit about the passing sequence.
it's a "would like" change, but something I can live without or house rule. |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
pfooti |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 10:18 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 29, 2003
Posts: 81
Status: Offline
|
|
mikeyc222 wrote: i know you love to stand on your soapbox and preach but honestly, no one(other than you and about 5 other people that i have actually seen) really cares about the passing sequence.
Umm, one point to these fora is for us to get on our respective soapboxes and make our cases. In Zombie's case in particular, he's made a couple of really good points, and has defended his case against almost all counter-arguments, without resorting to any flame-ish attacks. Tell the truth, I'm halfway convinced.
This is one place where the BBRC can hear its most vocal constituents, so we're not just arguing for the sake of arguing (which is fun, too), or even necessarily arguing to convince each other (which almost never happens, because by the time someone posts to a thread like this, their mind is already closed to alternatives); we're arguing to win others to our side, especially the BBRC members.
Wow, that was a very long sentence. I wonder if it makes sense at all.
If you're tired of the thread or Zombie's personal soapbox, stop reading this thread. Stick to your own personal soapboxes. |
_________________
Pfooti, Bishop of the OCN
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Carnage4u |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 10:35 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 36
Status: Offline
|
|
This is the most fun thread i have read in a long time with good points around.
My only comment on passing is this, and i know people claim game balance for the reason.
The Roll for the intercept before the Pass roll.
Here is why i hate this rule.
we have been lucky enough to get some people interested in our area in blood bowl. new players are great. we are games weekly at gamestore and always adding people.
But.. I show them some rules. I feel embassred tellin tthem how passing works..
yeah yousee you declare you pass action. YOu move to where you want to pass.
Then your opponent trys to incerept--
--Then they always say.. but shouldnt you roll to pas first.
Then i always have to say Of course not because the game balance would fall apart if we did it that way..
I will never belive that statement though. I dont think thats in the current debate atm.. you guys seem to be going back and forth well enough without anyother thoughts.
But I feel that rule is just weak and i have yet to find a new player that ever considers its anything but lame. at least it gives new people something about the game to laugh at besides haflings |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2004 - 04:34 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Carnage4u wrote: I dont think thats in the current debate atm.. you guys seem to be going back and forth well enough without anyother thoughts.
It's exactly what the current debate is about! Thanks for your input. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
