| Author |
Message |
Puckohue |
|
Post subject: Using team re-roll to re-roll 2nd failed doge.
 Posted: May 17, 2003 - 02:31 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 75
Status: Offline
|
|
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 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 17, 2003 - 05:21 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
| You just can't use the dodge skill again. You can use a TRR. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Puckohue |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 17, 2003 - 06:29 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 75
Status: Offline
|
|
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. |
_________________
NAF member #421
MAFOC member #4
Rabid Ratpack
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 17, 2003 - 07:07 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
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 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 17, 2003 - 11:50 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 75
Status: Offline
|
|
| Yeah, I agree. But the majority in my league don't. |
_________________
NAF member #421
MAFOC member #4
Rabid Ratpack
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 18, 2003 - 12:56 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
Well, tell the majority of your league they're wrong  |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Puckohue |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 18, 2003 - 02:26 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 75
Status: Offline
|
|
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 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 19, 2003 - 08:55 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 506
Status: Offline
|
|
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. |
_________________
The only thing to do with good advice is pass it on. It is never any use to oneself.
-Oscar Wilde
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 19, 2003 - 09:05 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
skummy wrote: 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.
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 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 19, 2003 - 09:14 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 506
Status: Offline
|
|
| 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. |
_________________
The only thing to do with good advice is pass it on. It is never any use to oneself.
-Oscar Wilde
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Agentrock |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 19, 2003 - 09:20 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 21, 2003
Posts: 182
Status: Offline
|
|
| 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".... |
_________________
The end-zone ???line of death??? does not discriminate when one tempts fate by using a ???go for it??? to pass over it.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 19, 2003 - 12:16 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
skummy wrote: 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.
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 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 19, 2003 - 01:15 PM
|
|
da Veiz-Prez
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Netherlands
Posts: 895
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
|
|
Zombie ???  (sorry, couldn't resist) |
_________________
First ever poster on the NAF site, Former Prez' proverbial pain in the bum and NTO-Netherlands
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Bevan |
|
|
Post subject: Q 7 Q committee
Posted: May 19, 2003 - 05:03 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
|
|
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 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 20, 2003 - 04:03 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| 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. |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
