| Author |
Message |
BloodBowlCommish |
|
Post subject: Passing Sequence
 Posted: Feb 02, 2004 - 04:56 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 07, 2004
Posts: 20
Status: Offline
|
|
Has it ever occured to you all that you can intercept a pass before you even know it is catchable? In the LRB on page 22 it states that "The coach must declare that one of his players will try to intercept before the thrower rolls to see if he is on target."
Now, this may have been discussed before, but would it not be better to change this to say "The coach must declare that one of his players will try to intercept after the thrower has determined that he has not fumbled. In accurate passes can still be intercepted in this way."
My reasoning is this: you declare a pass, measure to the target, intercept, pass, then catch...it should be declare pass, measure to the target, pass, intercept, then catch. I know that skills can complicate this, but essentially a pass actions has the (5) components listed above. To re-iterate them, they are (as plated now):
(1) Declare Pass Action
(2) Measure to Target
(3) Roll to Intercept
(4) Roll to Pass
(5) Roll to Catch
I think it should be:
(1) Declare Pass Action
(2) Measure to Target
(4) Roll to Pass
(3) Roll to Intercept
(5) Roll to Catch
What are all your opinions? Let's stop the insanity of intercepting a fumble 5 squares away... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 02, 2004 - 07:02 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| This is a very, very old issue. Yes, it has occured to us. It has occured to us ever since the rule was made this way 10 years ago. Some have complained about it many times (me included), some have defended it in the name of rules mechanics and game balance (even though the frequency of interceptions is basically the same either way), but one thing is for sure: it's not going to change anytime soon. |
_________________
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BloodBowlCommish |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 03, 2004 - 08:14 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 07, 2004
Posts: 20
Status: Offline
|
|
| Well...I will ask it again and send it to some one higher up i guess...I at least have to try, right? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 03, 2004 - 08:29 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
No, not really. The rule is fine the way it is. Zombie is wrong about the frequency of interceptions being the same before and after you work out if a fumble has happened.
Even if you house rule so that fumbles only happen on a 1 then there will only be 5/6ths of the interceptions as before. However fumbles often happen more than this so you are making something which is pretty rare anyway even rarer.
If it helps try not to think of the whole throwing mechanics as being purely stepwise. Think of it as a complex set of factors, which go into working out whether the pass is accurate, inaccurate, intercepted or fumbled. The chronology of events being less important. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
mikeyc222 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 03, 2004 - 08:38 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Posts: 180
Status: Offline
|
|
| to my knowledge, even members of the bbrc have said that it happens so rarely as it is there is no reason to change it simply to please people who get too literal with rules. |
_________________
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 03, 2004 - 09:18 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
As I said on the GW forum, leave it as it is. Interceptions aren't exactly everyday occurances now, so I don't want to see them any rarer, and it's not going to be changed.
If you don't like it, then House Rule it. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Tutenkharnage |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 03, 2004 - 09:44 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 620
Status: Offline
|
|
The rule won't change any time soon. If it did, a new set of complications would arise, led by these:
1. You'd have to determine the final target square before determining who was eligible to intercept. (After all, a player "shouldn't" be allowed to intercept an inaccurate pass that travels nowhere near him.)
2. There'd be no room for Pass Block. How would you move your players before the pass if the pass might sail elsewhere (and hence make your move illegal) if it was inaccurate?
I'm explaining this quickly, so it may not be clear. But think about it for a while and the difficulties may become apparent.
-Chet |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 03, 2004 - 11:46 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| These complications only exist if you want them to. In my league, we say that the pass going inaccurate might very well be because someone touched it in mid air. With this image in mind, you don't have to make any other change to accomodate this one. |
_________________
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 03, 2004 - 11:49 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| Oh, and it's not just a question of time frame. Do you think it makes sense that a pass has less chance of being fumbled if there's a guy in front of you threatening to intercept it? Certainly not! |
_________________
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Tojurub |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 04, 2004 - 12:06 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 18, 2003
Germany
Posts: 1520
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
|
|
I have a question which I'm not sure is covered in the LRB, but I might just be blind.
Do you still roll for the pass after you find out that it is intercepted?
I think that's the main point here. In my opinion the sequence should be like BloodBowlCommish wrote, but the interception roll should be done regardsless of the pass being accurate of not.
What's wrong with the following:
a) declare pass
b) measure and declare target
c) announce interception if a player is in the intended pass line (ruler width)
d) roll for pass
--> if fumbled stop here: TO
e) roll for interceptionn
--> if intercepted stop here: TO
f) roll for catch or scatter the ball.
That shouldn't cause any difficulties with the two points mentioned by Chet. The only change is the order of pass and interception, but you don't have to roll for interception if you know the pass is fumbled, which would make absolutely sense!!!!! In my opinion a player should not be able to intercept a fumbled ball! |
_________________
Dwarves rule!!! Especially when they pass!
3rd place Underworld Cup 2003
Swiss Champion 2004
2nd place Royal RumBBL 2015 and White Star Cup 2016
.....and now Ex-Vize-Prez
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
mikeyc222 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 04, 2004 - 12:32 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Posts: 180
Status: Offline
|
|
| there really just isn't any actual need for the change and i think that is the biggest point. the BBRC changes things that they feel need to be changed and don't change things that don't need to be changed. if you don't like it, house rule it. |
_________________
Because everything in life is just another Dumb Distraction!
http://www.dumbdistraction.com
Free the West Memphis 3!
http://www.wm3.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Tutenkharnage |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 04, 2004 - 03:05 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 620
Status: Offline
|
|
Tojurub wrote: Do you still roll for the pass after you find out that it is intercepted?
Absolutely not. Hence, it's impossible to "intercept a fumbled pass" - either the pass is intercepted, in which case you never roll to fumble, or the pass is not intercepted, in which case you can fumble it. But it's never both.
There's a singular exception, but it's a mechanical issue: Safe Throw. It's possible to make an INT roll, have it negated by Safe Throw, and then watch the thrower fumble the pass. But there's still no logical contradiction: either the pass is intercepted, or it's fumbled, but (again) it's never both.
My tabletop league just finished its 3rd season. In 96 games - that's 192 team-games - we've witnessed only 12 INTs. That means that the typical team intercepts one pass every 16 games. And this is a league with 9 active pass blockers, and only one player with Safe Throw (a skill he's never used).
Interceptions do not need to be made rarer. Fumbles do not need to increase in frequency.
-Chet |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
mikeyc222 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 04, 2004 - 03:30 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Posts: 180
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 04, 2004 - 06:57 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
Chet, you're not listening.
1. Interceptions would not be made significantly rarer, if at all.
2. It doesn't make any sense for a pass to have less chance of being fumbled when there's a guy trying to intercept. If anything, there should be more chance of fumble, not less. This has nothing to do with timing, the pass not having been throw yet, or any such exotic argument. It's just a question of probability. You don't fumble less often when there are people trying to intercept! |
_________________
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 04, 2004 - 06:58 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
mikeyc222 wrote: there really just isn't any actual need for the change and i think that is the biggest point.
How about this for a reason? So that the hundreds of leagues (i'm sure there are just that many worldwide) who currently have to house rule it just to have a rule that makes sense, don't have to house rule it anymore! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
