Stepping over prone players

[valedictor]

Has anyone ever proposed rules allowing players to step/ jump over prone players?

Thought it would be quite useful to be able to do, and not exactly tricky to incorporate into the rules.

Maybe it costs a player 3 squares to move over the prone player adjacent to him (as long as his move doesnt leave him actually ON the prone player) Or just a cost of 2 squares for big guys wanting to stomp over. Maybe players wishing to step over have to make a D6 roll the same as a GFI to see if they trip up in the process.

Prone big guys should be big enough to block any players wishing to step
over them, regardless of the standing player's size (just for simplicities sake).

Maybe it could be tied in with leap, very long legs or the standing player's agility in some way as well, for some extra +modifiers, but that would be overcomplicating it in my opinion...

I think it would be handy especially for really big guys or players with no access to the leap skill.. i mean, a minotaur is hardly gonna think twice about stomping over a snotling is he? And i can't see the giant i'm painting up at the moment just politely stepping around a fallen goblin...

Maybe there are practical complications with all this that i have neglected to consider thus far that would make it unworkable... just thought it would be a good, simple idea...

Cheers, John

[GalakStarscraper]

My league uses the Juggernaut skill (strength) to mimic something like this ... instead of stepping over ... its more of a kick out of the way.

Juggernaut (SKILL): A player with this skill in virtually unstoppable once he is in motion. If this player has moved at least one square first during a blitz action, opposing players may not use their Block or Stand Firm skills against his blocks OR he may use his blitz to move a prone or stunned player (from either team) into an unoccupied square using the same rules as a Push Back result from a blocking action. This skill can only be used once per a turn and may only be taken by a player with a minimum Strength of 5.

Just a suggestion.

Galak

[Bevan]

I wouldn't like to see player being able to jump over the bodies of injured players, except with special skills like leap and juggernaut.

Part of the skill in defending is making sure that even if your players are knocked over the bodies still get in the way.

[GalakStarscraper]

Agree with Bevan ... never worried about it.

In the MBBL2, there are multiple ways of getting past prone/stunned players.

Available on skill rolls:
Leap (AG skill)
Juggernaut (strength skill for ST 5+ players)
Wings (Physical trait)

Special team skills:
Dig for the Wee Folk team
Ethereal for the Spirit and Wild Cards teams
Flight for the Wild Cards team

oh yeah ... or have someone foul him into KO or worse shape is good also.

These options are enough for me ... I've had players do very high risk dodges just to put the body in the way ... having them be able to step over me removes an important tactic.

Galak

[valedictor]

Cheers for your comments guys. Just to offer some feedback to some of the points you raised;

Juggernaut... i had read about this skill a while back, but obviously not in that much depth that i realised its potential. It does definitely serve to address the apparent peculiarity of really big/powerful guys being hindered by smaller, easily brushed aside opponents. But on the downside, its not an official LRB rule (is it??...sorry- still very much the newbie here, so apologies if i'm wrong!) so its usage is probably limited i'm guessing?

Bevan, yup, i entirely agree with you that tactical consideration of downed players is a totally valid and important part of the defensive game. That's why I would never propose that moving over prone players be made an easy thing to do! I figured that a cost of 3 MA (plus risk of failing a GFI-style roll)) would prove to be sufficient enough to give pause for thought before attempting it, or at the very least make it a relatively unrewarding avenue of advance. To clarify, I would argue that a downed player SHOULD present a substantial obstacle on the pitch as you pointed out (providing you with your tactical element), but that the obstacle created should not be totally insurmountable. Reconsidering now in light of your comments, how about jumping over stunned players costs 3MA, but jumping over knocked down players costs 4MA (as they would be able to grab/kick at the standing guy as he moved over him? Add a GFI roll too, and i think that would be a pretty reasonable compromise...

Returning to Galak, all those other skills seem like fine options. I was more wondering what was the general reasoning behind not having any basic provision in the LRB for being able to simply move over a low obstacle such as a downed player via traditional old fashioned means (i.e: just stomping over!) when many other far more incredulous feats are possible for even a fairly undeveloped player to perform. When you look at it comparatively, simply stomping over a downed guy should be a walk in the park compared to some of the other stuff they get up to in a game!

Just to sum up then, i totally appreciate the need for downed players to remain a defensive element, and the skill in building tactics around this, but i really think that the jump over option should at least be a possibility without the need for special skills... just make it suitably tough to do it so that the defensive aspect isn't greatly compromised..

Cheers once again for your comments guys, much appreciated

p.s. Galak, love your giant miniature (theres a contradiction in terms!) do you know what company produced it? I have an old frost giant mini (Ral Partha i think) that i've been converting for Bloodbowl, which looks very similar to your guy, except he had his sword positioned across his stomach. Just wondered if maybe he was part of the same set. Still thinking about what stats to give him when he's done. Any suggestions?

John

[GalakStarscraper]

Juggernaut... i had read about this skill a while back, but obviously not in that much depth that i realised its potential. It does definitely serve to address the apparent peculiarity of really big/powerful guys being hindered by smaller, easily brushed aside opponents. But on the downside, its not an official LRB rule

Juggernaut has been referred to in the Oberwald supplement ... in addition there is a chance that it could show up as a house rules article in Blood Bowl Magazine some day ... one pager discussing some of the better new skills/traits that have been proposed on discussion boards over the years. Don't know when/if it will ever see print, but the last version I saw had Juggernaut on it.

Returning to Galak, all those other skills seem like fine options. I was more wondering what was the general reasoning behind not having any basic provision in the LRB for being able to simply move over a low obstacle such as a downed player via traditional old fashioned means (i.e: just stomping over!)

Because currently there are no rules in the LRB based really on size. Dwarves are shorter than elves, halflings shorter still. The problem is the wording for such a rule gets to complex too quickly. Big Guys can step over anyone but another Big Guy, players without Big Guy or Stunty RCs can step over Stunties, Stunties cannot step over anyone. Then are the penalites for trying worse for BG over Stunty vs non-stunty ... quickly the rule flows in blech land.

It makes an interesting house rule (just like being able to dodge away from AG 1 players more easily), but that's about it. Sorry

p.s. Galak, love your giant miniature (theres a contradiction in terms!) do you know what company produced it?

Ral Parth Storm Giant #11-431

Still thinking about what stats to give him when he's done. Any suggestions?

Well Galak Starscraper was a star player Storm Giant referee in 1st edition ... his stats would translate to something along the lines of ST 9 with the rest not mattering. He came onto the pitch about 50% of the time when 3 or more players try to foul a player or a block is made with 3 or more offensive assists as he hated these types of tactics. His movement was a perpetual blitz action with Juggernaut in effect for each block thrown and Tremendous Blow also for each knockdown (ie +2 to either AV or INJ). He didn't leave the pitch until he was knocked over (returning him to his senses) or had thrown at least one block at each of the offense players involved in the block/foul ... each player took turns moving Galak one square closer into the fray and anyone in his path (from either team) got blocked. I'm hoping to write up the rules better for using him in either House Rules #4 or #5.

As for a general all purpose Storm Giant, the one used by the MBBL2 based on the 1st/2nd edition fluff is:

A Norse team can have a Storm Giant as its one secret weapon player.

STORM GIANT - 140,000 gold - Penalty Roll 7+

Note: because they were just too big (ie too good) to play the game, Storm Giants were banned from the game of Blood Bowl by the NAF (according to the 2nd edition of Blood Bowl). But this doesn't stop one from running onto the pitch at the last second on occasion on team that use them.

While the Storm Giant is not considered a Big Guy player, he is similar to one in that he cannot use Team rerolls, earns star player points normally, and has the following stats:

Stats: 6 6 2 9
Block, Mighty Blow, Thick Skull, Cold Natured, Cold Resistant
General, Strength

Cold Resistant - A player with this skill was born and raised in the snow and cold. During the weather condition, Blizzard, the player will only slip and fall on a roll of 1 when attempting to move an extra square. In addition the player is so used to detecting movement during a snowstorm, he can attempt quick, short, and long passes (but not long bomb or Hail Mary passes) during the weather condition, Blizzard.

Cold Natured is exactly the same as Bonehead, except that the player cannot take the pitch if the weather is Sweltering Heat and is removed from the pitch immediately if the weather changes to Sweltering Heat.

[Mestari]

Even though prone players should be a valid tactic for restricting the movement of opponents, I think that there is room for a (house) rule for jumping over prone players.
Similar to leap, but accessible to all:

A player can jump over a prone player (any player to make it simple) into any of the three squares directly behind the prone player. The target square must be empty. This can be done as a part of any action that involves movement. The jump costs three squares of MA. GFI's can be used to gain the three squares, but the GFI rolls have to be rolled before the jump roll.


It's an ordinary AG roll.
If the roll is a '1' before modification, the jump is a complete failure and the player falls down in the starting square.
If the roll fails normally, the player falls down in the target square.
In both cases an armour roll is made.
If the roll is a success, the player lands to the target square and may continue his action.

The modifiers for the AG roll: (these have to be thought over a bit more throughly - we might want to make it harder and the exact modifiers need to be thought of)
-1 For jumping
+1 If player has moved 1 square prior to the jump
+1 If there are no TZ on the starting square
-1 For every TZ on the target square


ALSO:
In order to make this a good tactic also for the non-agile teams, and to indicate the nature of this jump as a different on from the one done with the Leap-skill, we could say that players with AG2 use AG3 for this action, and AG1 uses AG2 for this action.

[valedictor]

Thanks for all the giant info Galak; that was really good of you to dig all that stuff up. Cheers!

As for there not being any rules based on size in the LRB... surely stunty is the prime example of a size-based characteristic which affects many core rules during gameplay? (ignoring TZ's, disadvantaged when passing, easier to injure, etc.) You could also point to 'right stuff' as being pretty much exclusive to tiny players, and throw team mate is very much the domain of the overlarge, so i'm not sure that your statement is entirely correct, sorry.

I really liked your concept of Big guys being able to step over regular sized guys, who in turn can step over the smaller chaps, but as you say, when you start to worry about all sorts of other modifiers and considerations, it quickly becomes a mess. So why indeed worry about it?

You only have to look at numerous other core rules in the LRB which could be made a lot more in depth and elaborate, but they aren't because it's just not conducive to speedy, simple gameplay. Examples: Going for it is just as easy for a really slow, lumbering guy as it is for a really agile guy, but its a fail on a 1 for both. It's just as easy to dodge away from a treeman as it is to dodge away from an elf, so its -1 modifier from both.
(in my other threads, it's just my personal opinion that these rules could be tweaked in a very minor way without creating too much fuss and deviation from the current proceedures!)

If other core rules are kept simple like this, then there's no reason why stepping over prone players shouldn't follow suit and be kept every bit as simple. Yes, in theory it probably would be easier for a big guy to step over a stunty vs a non-stunty, but does that really matter that much? As long as the general effect of a player trying to move over a prone guy is obvious, then thats the important thing, and then your concept of 'Big stepping over regular, regular stepping over small' would serve to provide at least some degree of graduation to satisfy those coaches who like to see that little bit more 'logic' applied to the rulings.

I personally think that that would satisfy all the main considerations, i.e:

a.) the standing player is at least allowed to attempt the manouver,
b.) the defensive value of a downed player is still an appreciative factor,
c.) the rule is kept simple and concise, and no more or less abstracted than many other core rules,
d.) it just seems to make sense to be able to do it!

Just saw the other post on this thread (thanks Mestari)... i think that your suggestion is possibly overcomplicating a touch for my liking, but i think in principle it could be workable with some revision. Think i'll give all the comments from everyone some thought and try and come up with a simple streamlined solution that would make a respectable house rule.

Cheers once again guys, John

[GalakStarscraper]

House rule suggestion.

Make leaping over prone/stunned players an action that can be taking by any player in the game once per a movement (like GFI can be used twice). Use the rules for the Leap skill for this act and have it cost 1 extra point of MA (ie 3 instead of the normal 2 to use the Leap skill).

Then change the Leap skill so that it allows you to use the leap action during a movement without the 1 MA penalty and allows you to use your leap action to jump over standing players as well.

Just a suggestion for a generic way to add this option to a league. This is quick off the top of my head.

Oh and back at you on this one:

As for there not being any rules based on size in the LRB... surely stunty is the prime example of a size-based characteristic which affects many core rules during gameplay? (ignoring TZ's, disadvantaged when passing, easier to injure, etc.) You could also point to 'right stuff' as being pretty much exclusive to tiny players, and throw team mate is very much the domain of the overlarge, so i'm not sure that your statement is entirely correct, sorry.

There is not rule or skill in the same that is based on the size of a player. This is 100% accurate. Stunty, Right Stuff, Big Guy, Throw TeamMate are all racial characteristic with their own rules based on having them. Find me a rule that says it works one way if a player has Stunty, another if they have Big Guy, and a 3rd if they have neither and I'll agree that I was not correct. These racial characteristics are given to imply the size of the player but they are self contained and do not affect other rules outside of themselves.

Your original request for stepping over prone players and Chet's original idea for changing Piling On where based on testing for size based RCs which would be an entirely new mechanic in BB. Not trying to be nitpicky here, but I wanted you to understand the difference in the current game mechanics: RCs vs results based on RCs are two very different game mechanics.

Galak

[valedictor]

Hi again Galak,

Thanks for clarifying the thrust of your argument there. If i understand you correctly now, you are implying that rules are one thing, and skills/traits, r.c's are something separate which are not rules in themself, nor based on rules, but may well include reference to rules elsewhere in the LRB... right? (brain spinning now!) Hope that's more or less what you meant.

I myself pointed out stunty as an example as, up until now, i have always considered everything in the LRB (barring the fluff/examples and other bits and pieces) as 'the rules' ... e.g: observing the correct proceedure for making a dodge roll would be 'following the dodging rules', just as adding your strength to the armour roll would be 'following the piling-on rule', or making that cursed d6 roll would be observing the 'take root' rule.

I guess having devoted yourself to the hobby for so long, the wise heads such as yourselves have taken to (and indeed most likely needed to) be extra specific with your definitions of what are mechanics, what are rules, what are characteristics, etc, both to set a standard/format for the way in which the game is administered and developed, and also to address those newcomers (such as myself) who hit you with rules queries and ideas, but have little prior knowledge of how you actually go about defining all this stuff officially.

In summary, to me, a rule is a rule is a rule, as long as it tells you how some part of the game should be played. Now i have some idea of how you guys break it all down, and what terminology applies to what, i can see entirely what you mean now... Basically, it was just me generalising as opposed to your more specific approach. With a generalised view, i obviously didn't think twice about referring to stunty as a 'rule', but with your established terminology in place, then it merely becomes a characteristic amidst all the other stuff. That old Obi Wan quote seems quite apt... "...from a certain point of view"..

Don't worry too much about being nitpicky...without a nice bit of nitpicking now and then, us newbies will never learn better

All the best for now, John

[valedictor]

Just wondering Galak, have you ever come across a suggestion for a rule change that made you think 'damn, that's really cool, i must try and get that into the official rules somehow', but just couldn't because it involved introducing a whole new mechanic? If so, i'd be interested to know what it was, and how tempted you would be to endorse fiddling with the mechanics as a consequence (obviously, sized-based mechanics wasn't one of them LOL )... or do you personally feel that the game is as close to perfect as it's gonna get?

Is there any part of the game that you feel isn't quite good enough, or could be dramatically improved? Would be interested to get the grand perspective from someone experienced...

John

[GalakStarscraper]

Okay a couple things ... lot of stress in my personal life lately ... so if my reply came off high handed ... very sorry ... I can do that sometimes without even trying.

I'm kinda a bad one to ask about rejecting new rules though. I tend to be very open to new suggestions. In fact if you ever check out my league, the MBBL2 ... well we use just about more house rules than anyone short of the BOBBA league.

My other league the MBBL, uses all the experimental rules to assist with testing.

New rules mechanics that I didn't like .... well size based rules don't thrill me at all ... you were not the first to ask about one, Chet's Piling On change original was size based. I don't like JKL's PGFI rule but thats mainly because I one of my main favorite teams is a Halfling team and I'm using 3 to 4 2nd GFIs every turn so while I normally don't dislike rules due to effects on Halflings, but this one just doesn't work for me. I like Chet's no injury mods originally but then the whole thing just turned into a mechanics mess so it got mentally shelved. Chet is trying a simpler version in his own league which might reinterest me. Finally Chet's kicking rule was a definite change to the mechanics and I like it and am working with him to test a simpler version that could be added to the game.

The biggest change that I love that I just know will never be official because its too big of a change. On-pitch spellcasters .... leagues that use them LOVE them ... but its too big of a mechanic change ... never be official, but man I love using them.

Galak