3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

[Jump]

Hi,
3 questions:

1) Take Root skill, in the last line pg 68:

"If a player fails his take root roll as part of a blitz action, he may not block that turn".
Why? It means that a Treeman start the action, declare a Blitz, 1 on root dice, than he cannot block? Is it true?

2) Disturbing Presence or Foul Appearance

Skill use is mandatory, so I can decide to not use that skill? For example, a player block my warrior, and throws 3 dices:
D6 for the FA, 2 block dices for the block, make 1-skull-skull. I know that throwing 3 dices is not good, but can I decide to "NOT USE that skill?" If skill use is mandatory, and the skill has not a MUST USE (like Frenzy) I think that I can choose it, right?

3) Injury roll
I block, enemy down, armor roll passed: can I decide to roll or not the injury roll? Because in chain push situation sometimes it's useful to "not take that player out"

Thanks in advance for answers!
Bye!

[lunchmoney]

1) Take Root skill, in the last line pg 68:

"If a player fails his take root roll as part of a blitz action, he may not block that turn".
Why? It means that a Treeman start the action, declare a Blitz, 1 on root dice, than he cannot block? Is it true?

Beyond because that's how its written in the rule book? Yes it's true.

2) Disturbing Presence or Foul Appearance

Skill use is mandatory, so I can decide to not use that skill? For example, a player block my warrior, and throws 3 dices:
D6 for the FA, 2 block dices for the block, make 1-skull-skull. I know that throwing 3 dices is not good, but can I decide to "NOT USE that skill?" If skill use is mandatory, and the skill has not a MUST USE (like Frenzy) I think that I can choose it, right?

Skill use is not mandatory unless the skill explicitly states it is (Frenzy for example).
However you are doing it wrong. Your opponent rolls D6 for FA before they roll the block dice. If it's not a 1 then they roll the block dice. Not all at the same time.
(Disturbing Presence has no effect on blocking, only moving the ball).

3) Injury roll
I block, enemy down, armor roll passed: can I decide to roll or not the injury roll? Because in chain push situation sometimes it's useful to "not take that player out"

Thanks in advance for answers!
Bye!

If AV is broken you must roll for the injury.

[lunchmoney]

Further to the injury roll:
I've just read the book (always a good idea) and it says you are allowed to roll for injury, not must. Suggesting it is optional. Would look to Galak for his thoughts on that.

INJURIES
Unless the rules state otherwise, any player that is Knocked
Down may be injured. The opposing coach rolls two D6 and
adds their scores together in an attempt to try to beat the
Knocked Down player"s Armour value. If the roll succeeds, then
the opposing coach is allowed to roll on the Injury table in the
next column to see what injury the player has suffered.

[lunchmoney]

Further to the FA question:
FA is mandatory; the skill says you must roll to overcome FA.

Foul Appearance (Mutation)
The player"s appearance is so horrible that any opposing player that
wants to block the player (or use a special attack that takes the place of
a block) must first roll a D6 and score 2 or more. If the opposing player
rolls a 1 he is too revolted to make the block and it is wasted (though the
opposing team does not suffer a turnover).

[Jump]

Ok thanks, I wait for the ufficial confirmation of the exact intepretation
Thanks again!

[Darkson]

Even if FA wasn't mandatory, in your example you've used it so he had to roll the D6 to get past it - you can't go back in time to decide not to use it.

And your opponent shouldn't be rolling the FA and block dice together, and you shouldn't be letting them.


[Edit] Must stop posting on phone.

[lunchmoney]

And your opponenet should* be rolling the FA and block dice together, and you shouldn't be letting them.

*shouldn't....

[Afroman]

1) Take Root skill, in the last line pg 68:

"If a player fails his take root roll as part of a blitz action, he may not block that turn".
Why? It means that a Treeman start the action, declare a Blitz, 1 on root dice, than he cannot block? Is it true?

Beyond because that's how its written in the rule book? Yes it's true.

As Lunchmoney said, it's true.

But as you noticed, there doesn't seem to be a good reason for this. Will the tree be overpowered if it is allowed to block a player in base contact once he declared blitz and failed the TR? doubtly.

Probably fluffy. As the tree composes it self to charge its opponent and continue past him he roots and is so surprised that he forgets to hit the guy. Maybe. Just a guess thou....

[Darkson]

Blitz action takes a point of movement to throw the block (regardless of whether you follow-up or not).

A Rooted Treeman has no movement.

Therefore, it can't spend a point of movement to Blitz (throw the block) so that's why it's not allowed.

[Afroman]

Blitz action takes a point of movement to throw the block (regardless of whether you follow-up or not).

A Rooted Treeman has no movement.

Therefore, it can't spend a point of movement to Blitz (throw the block) so that's why it's not allowed.

That makes actually sense.....

You realize something new everyday. THanks

[GalakStarscraper]

Sooo ... this is one of those I would probably change if I had another go as this is the wording from 3rd edition that went unchanged. I would have to say looking at the current wording of page 11 that is you could choose to leave the opposing player on the ground face up instead of rolling for injury if you wanted. Re-read everything ... cannot find anything that would convince me that the current wording would force you to roll for injury.

[Steam Ball]

Following with reviews/changes: What about letting trees swap the Blitz with a Block action if they root? Current is clear, the tree wastes everything, even if target in is contact.

[Regash]

Would you deem the Blitz Action still being lost and instead of switch rather convert it to a block?
Not that I'm fond of the idea, I'm just curious.

[Bakunin]

Sooo ... this is one of those I would probably change if I had another go as this is the wording from 3rd edition that went unchanged. I would have to say looking at the current wording of page 11 that is you could choose to leave the opposing player on the ground face up instead of rolling for injury if you wanted. Re-read everything ... cannot find anything that would convince me that the current wording would force you to roll for injury.

One more of these things people would not believe, but the rules seems to be clear. It says "allowed".

[Jump]

Personally I agree...for me "allowed" means that if I want, I do, if I don't want I can don't reroll the injury.
In case of Chain Pushing it can be usefull to "Not" use.

How can I have an official NAF answer?