Pass Fumble house rule what do you think?

[Cyrus-Havoc]

I run a small league and at the end of each season we discuss the rules and whether we need or want to make any changes house rules etc.

One player wants to change the pass fumble rule so that only an unmodified roll of one is a fumble or that only tackle zones should be counted on a modified roll. He feels that it is unrealistic that it is more likely to fumble due to distance attempted and also feels it would encourage more passing in the game generally if we made this modification. He has managed to get 50% support for this leaving me the casting vote.

I do not support this rule change because the rule has remained unchanged since 3rd edition and I think it will encourage both long distance ‘Punting’ and a sort of ‘Hail Mary’ tactic without the skill choice.

However I want to be as impartial as possible so I would like to hear any views you have on this as a house rule before I pass judgment.

[Jural]

In general, this change would open up the game and make passing a more viable option. In many leagues, passing is an afterthought or a desperation tactic, which is sad.

If your league has seen the demise of passing, I'd add it in. If you are happy with the current passing balance, I wouldn't touch it.

I think it's a legitimate house rule, and it depends upon the league. I've heard of leagues who us it, and it isn't too over the top (not, for example, like allowing Big Men to lose their negatraits.)

I don't think it infringes on Hail Mary Pass too much though. Hail Mary has three advantages which this never will:

1) No tackle zone modifiers
2) No range limitations
3) No chance of interception

Frankly, Hail Mary Pass is more useful for these 3) reasons.

[wollfe]

well i've got to say that it would definatley increase the amount of passing plays - definatley include tacklezones in the minus's otherwise it'll be too easy for teams to get the ball to safety

it's the sort of thing i would like to see to actually help even things up vs the 2-1 grind

[Darkson]

If you're happy to see long-bombs into the opposing end to clear their lines everytime they get the ball loose, go for it.

If you want to avoid this chessy tactic (without using a skill choice at least), then don't modify the pass rules.

[wollfe]

If you're happy to see long-bombs into the opposing end to clear their lines everytime they get the ball loose, go for it.

If you want to avoid this chessy tactic (without using a skill choice at least), then don't modify the pass rules.

maybe to stop the cheesiess u could say that you actually have to pass it to a player rather than just targeting a square - thus no line-clearance

[DesTroy]

If you're happy to see long-bombs into the opposing end to clear their lines everytime they get the ball loose, go for it.

If you want to avoid this chessy tactic (without using a skill choice at least), then don't modify the pass rules.

maybe to stop the cheesiess u could say that you actually have to pass it to a player rather than just targeting a square - thus no line-clearance

Actually, that's the way passing should be IMHO: no deliberate passing to empty squares allowed. But I know that'll never happen.

[Jural]

If you're happy to see long-bombs into the opposing end to clear their lines everytime they get the ball loose, go for it.

If you want to avoid this chessy tactic (without using a skill choice at least), then don't modify the pass rules.

maybe to stop the cheesiess u could say that you actually have to pass it to a player rather than just targeting a square - thus no line-clearance

Actually, that's the way passing should be IMHO: no deliberate passing to empty squares allowed. But I know that'll never happen.

I agree, except maybe Hail Mary Pass should allow it.

[Master Wang]

I like passing to empty squares - why pass to a gutter runner who'll get flattened and give possession back to the other team when I can pass to a square that if he is still upright only he can get to next turn? I'll admit the clearing the lines tactic can be a bit annoying, but if you think your opponent is likely to do it, just leave a man back deep.

As to your rules change - I suppose it depends on how much passing is going on in your league, and who would benefit from making the alteration. Personally I wouldn't change anything, but I like passing and rarely get put off by the chance of failure/fumbles. I even managed a long-bomb to an orc blitzer, who dodged away to score, the other day. The thrower even fumbled the first attempt before re-rolling with pass; although the game was in the bag so I had nothing to lose by such risky play

[DoubleSkulls]

I used to play in a league with that house rule and I don't like it. The problem, I feel, is that its too easy at the end of a half to punt the ball downfield where its difficult for your opponent to get to it. The risk/reward ratio is out of kilter (a 1/6 chance of fumbling vs a much higher chance of getting away with not conceding a TD).

[Cyrus-Havoc]

Thanks for your input.
Its league night tonight and my decision is to veto this as a house rule unless there is more support for it in the group, which I think unlikely.
I do like the idea of encouraging more passing but I think this is outweighed by the likely use to punt the ball to long bomb range at every opportunity.

[Kyrel]

I'd vote in favour for the rules change. My friends and I have played it that way for ages, and it causes no problems. I should add though that we also have instituted the rule that you are not allowed to pass to an empty square on the pitch when passing. You MUST target a friendly player (and this includes the Hail Mary Pass btw). Also, we don't allow people to measure the distance before declaring where they will be passing to. We have to declare the Pass Action and the recipient of the pass, before taking out the range ruler. Doing it this way cuts down on a lot of cheesy tactics (and also makes more sense in our eyes...).

[plasmoid]

I'd go for it.
I don't see the problem with the intentional grounding. It's just a new tactic, and coaches will have to adjust to it.
But if your opponent often "punts" the ball away, you need to have a guy hanging back to punt the ball right back.

IMO it would open up the game a bit, which is preferable to 2-1 grind cages all the live long day.

Cheers
Martin

[wollfe]

IMO it would open up the game a bit, which is preferable to 2-1 grind cages all the live long day.

Cheers
Martin

amen to that brother

[MadLordAnarchy]

I do this.

[whitetiger]

We play that if your throw is within the length of the template, you must target a player. If it is longer than that, you must have the HMP skill. And we still use the fumble rule as it is in LBR5.