Talk Fantasy Football

As I've never used secret weapons in my Blood Bowl career, I read over these rules in LRB2.0 in Extreme-Rule-Lawyer-Mode (tm) and got over an interesting point regarding the Blunderbuss.

It says:

The normal rules for passing the ball are not used
when it is fired from a blunderbuss. Instead,
nominate a square anywhere on the field, and then
roll a dice to see where the ball comes down. On a
roll of 1-3 it scatters in exactly the same way as a
kick-off (ie, it scatters the number of squares equal
to the roll of a dice in a random direction). On a roll
of 4-6 the ball is bang on target and may be caught
by a player in the target square in the same way as
an accurate pass.

Now i wonder if you suffer a turnover when you fire the ball upcourt and it's inaccurate and can not be caught by your team. As the "normal rules for passing do not apply" this could be interpretated as "there's no turnover for an inaccurate shoot". Remember, in the turnover section it says:

3. The ball is passed and not caught by a
player from the moving team

and the Blunderbuss rules says the normal passing rules do not apply.

Is firing a Blunderbuss still treated as a pass regarding turnovers?

I'm not taking any position here (personally i think it should be a turnover), but i'm just trying to filter out what the rules say.

Happy word-turning!
Tim.

The normal rules do not apply and it's not on the list of things that cause a turnover so I would say, No it does not.

Should it? Yes, it should.

Most coaches house rule that using a blunderbuss is considered a "pass" action. But, according to the rulebook, its not. So, I don't *think* its a turnover.

Blood

The wording should be rewritten, "the normal RANGE rules for passing . . . " or it should just be called a special hail mary pass. Best idea in my opinion would be to just make it a hail mary pass altogether, including a chance to fumble (u dint shove the ball in far enuf, or dint put in enuf powder, etc).

IMO its a turnover. You don't expect GW to write decent rules do you?

Hmm, this looks much closer than i thought ...
Obviously there's no common sense on how to read this rule.

How about one of the Rulz Gurus stepping up and helping us a bit on that?

Tim.

I'm shocked that it is this close. Getting the ball anywhere upfield and then being able to move over to it just does not sound in line with the way BB works. If this is a legal maneuver, Chaos Dwarf tactics are going to require a complete rewrite. Should it be that much better than Hail Mary Pass? I also don't think Skaven should get access to the blunderbuss, as was suggested in some rules I've seen. I can see them shooting it to an open space, dodging out and picking it up with 4 agility sure hands. A really ugly way to win the game.

My answer ... in my leagues its a turnover.

Strictly by the LRB ... its not.

Clear as mud?

Galak

Tim, thanks for pointing that out. Might have to try that in the REBBL Skaven league

The normal rules for passing the ball are not used

To me, this implies that you are indeed making a pass action. It's just saying that the mechanics is different, but it's implying that this is still a pass. So turnover it is. Besides, it wouldn't make any sense otherwise and no commish in his right mind would rule that it's not a turnover.

Zombie:
There is no line in the rule book saying that firing the blunderbuss is treated as a pass action. Just a line that says that passing rules do not apply

Although it's quite logical, your implication would have other consequences than the TO question. If using the blunderbuss is the pass action, you can't pass and use the 'buss in the same turn (e.g. quickpass to the 'buss guy, then fire it upcourts). With some more comparisons and analogies you might figure out that you can't use a blunderbuss in a blizzard (cmp. Hail Mary).


The longer these discussions go, i'm tempted to field Zzharg Madeye in my CD team at the Blood Bowl. If the current rules do say, that there's no turnover on an inaccurate shoot, it's worth dropping a RR for the upgrade of a regular Chaos Dwarf. However, i don't want to have 6 rules discussions in 6 matches (yes it is broken, but that's what the rules seem to say) ... it's a though decison!

Well you could always email Andy Hall to find out which interpretation of Blunderbuss he is happy with, print off the email and show it to your opponent before the game.

I agree with Zombie on this one. Why would the book say "the normal rules for passing are not used" rather than "this is not a pass".

It is clear that this is a pass action, but that the normal rules for working out where the ball goes are not used. Apart from that, if it is accurate you catch the ball "in the same way as an accurate pass" or if inaccurate it would the same way as an inaccurate pass. The turnover rules for events after passing would apply as usual.

I believe that it is a pass action, but just uses different rules, in the same way that Hail Mary uses diferrent rules for the way the ball travels.

Tim wrote:Zombie:
There is no line in the rule book saying that firing the blunderbuss is treated as a pass action. Just a line that says that passing rules do not apply :wink:

No, but it's implied by that sentence. If using the blunderbuss weren't a pass action, then that sentence would make no sense.

Tim wrote:Although it's quite logical, your implication would have other consequences than the TO question. If using the blunderbuss is the pass action, you can't pass and use the 'buss in the same turn (e.g. quickpass to the 'buss guy, then fire it upcourts).

I know, and i meant to add that as well, but forgot to. Using the blunderbuss indeed uses up your pass action.

But you could also say that if normal rules for passing are not used, then the normal rules for the pass not being caught causing a turnover are also not used.

another one for Galak's 2003 clarification list methinks.