| Author |
Message |
GalakStarscraper |
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Nov 02, 2006 - 05:35 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote: As the former ANSWER_MOD on the GW BB forum, I can confirm that a Block doesn't NOT have to be thrown as part of a Blitz action, and that the move used in the original post is completely legal - wheter you think it smells of cheese is entirely up to the individual. Darkson is absolutely correct.
A blitz actions does not require a block at all. The may in the description means JUST THAT ... the block is optional. Same thing for a Pass action ... you do not have to throw the ball if you declare the action.
It is entirely legal to declare a Blitz action with a Wild Animal and just move the player without blocking. If you house rule it otherwise Stout ... just make sure you guys make a note that you ARE house ruling so that when you league mates play in tournaments they realize what the actual rules are.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
StoutYoungblood |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 02, 2006 - 06:57 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 18, 2005
Undisclosed
Posts: 87
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Thanks to Darkson, Galak and others for the clarification. Now its back to our board to discuss some more.  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MichaelDonaghy |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 16, 2007 - 05:50 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 16, 2005
Posts: 10
Status: Offline
|
|
GalakStarscraper wrote: Darkson wrote: As the former ANSWER_MOD on the GW BB forum, I can confirm that a Block doesn't NOT have to be thrown as part of a Blitz action, and that the move used in the original post is completely legal - wheter you think it smells of cheese is entirely up to the individual. Darkson is absolutely correct.
A blitz actions does not require a block at all. The may in the description means JUST THAT ... the block is optional. Same thing for a Pass action ... you do not have to throw the ball if you declare the action.
It is entirely legal to declare a Blitz action with a Wild Animal and just move the player without blocking. If you house rule it otherwise Stout ... just make sure you guys make a note that you ARE house ruling so that when you league mates play in tournaments they realize what the actual rules are.
Galak
is that true even in the LRB 5.0? i have a wild animal but i;'m not sure how comfortable i am with that. th LRB5 doesnt mention the "may" part of pervious incarnations of the rule as far as i remember.
whats the final ruling on this with full complaince with lrb 5.0? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
nyarlathotep |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 16, 2007 - 06:32 AM
|
|
Mekboy
Joined: Mar 15, 2006
Posts: 298
Status: Offline
|
|
| Galak says that there doesn't have to be a block thrown on a blitz. So that's what my Minotauir is using |
_________________
Crawling Chaos since 1842...B.C.
My Tournament Record
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 16, 2007 - 07:03 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
MichaelDonaghy wrote: is that true even in the LRB 5.0? i have a wild animal but i;'m not sure how comfortable i am with that. th LRB5 doesnt mention the "may" part of pervious incarnations of the rule as far as i remember.
whats the final ruling on this with full complaince with lrb 5.0?
Quote: Page 7 LRB 5.0:
Blitz: The player may move a number of squares equal to their MA. He may make one block during the move. The block may be made at any point during the move, and ???costs??? one square of movement.
You can declare a Blitz with a Wild Animal for the 2+ and then just move if you want.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BB_Babe |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 16, 2007 - 10:11 AM
|
|
Joined: Sep 23, 2005
Posts: 211
Status: Offline
|
|
Yeah, if you can roll a 2+ 
My poor Snow Troll failed 2 out of 4 Blitz rolls before she managed to score a goal after she surprisingly caught the ball. Everyone was yelling at her to run for the goal, she was roaring back at them, it was all very confusing, but she finally made it.
Cheers,
Mo |
_________________
ArisiaBowl
http://www.geocities.com/arisiabowl/
Some Boston Blood Bowl Stuff
http://redwings-wilder.livejournal.com/
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
yarrick1imperial |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 14, 2007 - 08:15 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2003
Posts: 33
Status: Offline
|
|
I reckon its straight forward since you are blitzing, so if you are not running up to hit someone then its not a blitz is it, its more like just moving, which means that ya should have rolled ya 4+ for wild animal, since you did'nt hit anyone, people with WA want to hit things and i would say thats how you should play it...
If ya making a Blitz action then thats what you do... blitz something... and move on... none of this other crap of arrhh what do they mean... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 14, 2007 - 08:35 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
yarrick1imperial wrote: I reckon its straight forward since you are blitzing, so if you are not running up to hit someone then its not a blitz is it, its more like just moving, which means that ya should have rolled ya 4+ for wild animal, since you did'nt hit anyone, people with WA want to hit things and i would say thats how you should play it...
If ya making a Blitz action then thats what you do... blitz something... and move on... none of this other crap of arrhh what do they mean...
You don't have to hand-off when you declare a Hand-off Action.
You don't have to pass the ball when you declare a Pass Action.
You don't have to foul when you declare a Foul Action.
So sorry to tell you that you are wrong ... but the last line of this is:
You don't have to block when you declare Blitz Action.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
yarrick1imperial |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 15, 2007 - 02:22 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2003
Posts: 33
Status: Offline
|
|
| well if ya not doing it then why declare it anyway... i have a feeling that when they do an update on the LRB5 it will be in there after this... like i said, it looks like to me that people are not playing the game as it is ment to be played, too much politics, i reckon if you declare something then thats what you are going to do, whatever it is passing etc, its not very sportsman like to change your idea half way thru your movement... for example ohh i said i was passing but now i will just move sounds like rule abuse to me, i think i would house rule this as i see fit in my own league. fixes the problem if you declare an action that thats what you must do, otherwise you are abusing the rules in my opinon. otherwise you are not using WA as the skill it should be give you are unfair advantage, just becasue you lose you blitz for the turn even if you roll a 1 still give you a 5/6 chance to be successful compared to 50/50 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mootaz |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 15, 2007 - 03:11 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 16, 2005
Undisclosed
Posts: 102
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Status: Offline
|
|
yarrick1imperial wrote: i have a feeling that when they do an update on the LRB5 it will be in there after this.
I seriously doubt that. Galak, the one that gave you the answer, would be the one (probably) responsible for incorporating that into LRB6 as he was the person responsible for LRB5, and you have heard his opinion.  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
yarrick1imperial |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 15, 2007 - 03:23 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2003
Posts: 33
Status: Offline
|
|
| Oh well if ya don't ask ya don't get, but i think this ruling of his will have a few coaches pulling their hair out a little, but thats what is good about Bloodbowl leagues is that the commissionar can always change the rules to see fit... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 15, 2007 - 05:41 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
yarrick1imperial wrote: it looks like to me that people are not playing the game as it is ment to be played
its not very sportsman like to change your idea half way thru your movement
for example ohh i said i was passing but now i will just move sounds like rule abuse to me,
Disagree with all 3 of the above (especially the first one as I talk pretty regularly with and during the LRB 5.0 development had 3 face-to-face dinners to discuss the rules with the guy who wrote the game in the first place.)
If I declare a Pass action but need to dodge twice to get to a position to throw the ball and need to use a re-roll on the first dodge for it to be successful and decide the 2nd dodge would be too risky and thus I want to keep the ball. Than I've made a decision that a normal quarterback would make in the game. I thought I was going to pass but now clearly based on the game circumstances ... I'll keep the ball for now.
With your rules ... you would force folks to throw the ball no matter what. That's not my idea of fun.
And what about a Foul action ... if I needed to dodge once and GFI once to get in position to foul and burn a re-roll on the dodge ... are you going to force me to GFI so I can foul with your league house rules? What will be the penalty if I don't???
ALL of the actions that involve movement have optional components for just this reason. If you house rule it to be otherwise ... then you force players to play more consertivately (less fun games) and you also have to house rule whether players suffer a penalty for not completing an action OR force them to risk their player's lives unneccessarily to do so.
But ... yeah ... a BB commissioner is free to change this ... just personally think it would be a really bad idea to do.
In the end ... do you not think that a team giving up its Blitz action just to move the Minotaur isn't downside enough??? Most games I play ... I actually NEED my Blitz action on my turns. So my opinion is that the rules work just like they should .. that I would activiately discourage you (or anyone else) from changing them (unless you never want anyone in your league to take a WA player (in which case ... just remove them from the rosters for your league (lot simpler))) ... and finally ... I can promise you that this won't be changed in any update to LRB 5.0.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Clan_Skaven |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 15, 2007 - 06:19 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 19, 2003
Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Posts: 2604
Location: Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
GalakStarscraper wrote: yarrick1imperial wrote: it looks like to me that people are not playing the game as it is ment to be played
its not very sportsman like to change your idea half way thru your movement
for example ohh i said i was passing but now i will just move sounds like rule abuse to me,
Disagree with all 3 of the above (especially the first one as I talk pretty regularly with and during the LRB 5.0 development had 3 face-to-face dinners to discuss the rules with the guy who wrote the game in the first place.)
If I declare a Pass action but need to dodge twice to get to a position to throw the ball and need to use a re-roll on the first dodge for it to be successful and decide the 2nd dodge would be too risky and thus I want to keep the ball. Than I've made a decision that a normal quarterback would make in the game. I thought I was going to pass but now clearly based on the game circumstances ... I'll keep the ball for now.
With your rules ... you would force folks to throw the ball no matter what. That's not my idea of fun.
And what about a Foul action ... if I needed to dodge once and GFI once to get in position to foul and burn a re-roll on the dodge ... are you going to force me to GFI so I can foul with your league house rules? What will be the penalty if I don't???
ALL of the actions that involve movement have optional components for just this reason. If you house rule it to be otherwise ... then you force players to play more consertivately (less fun games) and you also have to house rule whether players suffer a penalty for not completing an action OR force them to risk their player's lives unneccessarily to do so.
But ... yeah ... a BB commissioner is free to change this ... just personally think it would be a really bad idea to do.
In the end ... do you not think that a team giving up its Blitz action just to move the Minotaur isn't downside enough??? Most games I play ... I actually NEED my Blitz action on my turns. So my opinion is that the rules work just like they should .. that I would activiately discourage you (or anyone else) from changing them (unless you never want anyone in your league to take a WA player (in which case ... just remove them from the rosters for your league (lot simpler))) ... and finally ... I can promise you that this won't be changed in any update to LRB 5.0.
Galak
Well said Galak.
Rod |
_________________
"2006 SPIKE Champion!"
"Death-Bowl IV & V, Most Casualties!, Death-Bowl VI Best Team!"
"2008 Dagger Bowl Champion"
Host of the Warpstone Cup, Q'ermitt Bowl & the Hope Bowl
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Cramy |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 15, 2007 - 10:30 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2006
Canada
Posts: 403
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
@yarrick1imperial
To clarify one point. If you declare an action like blitz, and you later decide not to throw a block, you have then wasted your blitz for that turn. Not throwing the block does not turn the action into a move action.
This is quite a penalty to take just to move your WA player.
And as Galak pointed-out, not allowing for this will make the game dynamics a nightmare in cases where you cannot accomplish the action (ex: Can't get to a position to hand-off if a hand-off action was declared, or can't get to a position to throw a block if a blitz action was declared).
Marc-Andre |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
yarrick1imperial |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 15, 2007 - 12:25 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2003
Posts: 33
Status: Offline
|
|
| hmm ok i see your point for the other rules as it has always been played that way, as far as i can see, so let me get this straight in order to get a 2+ roll on say a rat ogre with WA, then all you have to do is say you are going to blitz with him then decide not to and for example if he had the ball to score... he could just move to do so giving he yas successful on his 2+ roll... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
