Hand Off vs. Quick Pass

BlanchPrez · Post by **BlanchPrez** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:58 pm

Hey all,

We ran into an interesting situation in our game last night. A human player had possession of the ball, but with only one turn in the match, was not going to be able to score. His catcher had the ball, and wated to pass it to the other catcher to get SPP's. Now, the other catcher was in the square adjacent to his first catcher, and he assumed that would make it a quick pass. As league commissioner, I ruled that it would not be a quick pass, but rather a hand off, as that's only a one square pass. However, looking through the rules, we couldn't find anything that said one way or the other. So, I'm curious what everyone else here says about this situation.

Chris

narkotic · Post by **narkotic** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 3:16 pm

Easy:
if you stand adjacent to another player it's hand-over
if there is at least one square in between its a pass.

At least, the coach can roll any dice he wants, but SPP are only awarded for a pass = at least one square distance

No one assumes that someone will throw the ball to a player who is standing one feet away. Other examples: you cannot jump over empty squares or decide to dodge team-mates, or intercept own passes. These actions are assumed not to happen.

I would rule this as I said , as I do not like coaches trying to squeeze SPP in such a cheesy manner.

If they're desperate for SPP they should at least mov one square away and make a normal pass (still cheesy but no objection bc they play by the rules)

BlanchPrez · Post by **BlanchPrez** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 3:58 pm

While I didn't care that he was trying to squeeze in SPP's at the end of the game (neitehr did the other coach, for that matter), my thought was the same as yours. A pass is at least one square away, otherwise it's a handoff. I just didn't see this anywhere in the rules, so I made the ruling.

Chris

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 4:25 pm

narkotic wrote:if you stand adjacent to another player it's hand-over
if there is at least one square in between its a pass.

Thats not quite right. There is no minimum range on a pass. As you may only handoff once per turn you may be forced to pass to someone adjacent to you.

ZanzerTem · Post by **ZanzerTem** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 4:39 pm

Ian is spot on. You may make a pass action to an adjacent player.

Consider Dump off. If your passer is being blocked, and you want to use Dump Off, but the only eligible player is in an adjacent square........

See where I'm going with this? You should have allowed that coach the ability to pass, but it's your league, and you are the commish. It's your decision.

narkotic · Post by **narkotic** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 5:03 pm

hhmm, interesting. Your comments made me think. I looked it up and ianwilliams is right: there is no minimum distance for passing (it just says you can pass to any other team-member). And if you take the possibility to pass to an empty adjacent square (which is perfectly ok according to the rules) it should be ok to pass to an adjacent player, as well.

But back to the original notion of the question:
If a player wants to earn SPPs for a completion for a zero-square-pass then he should declare it a a pass action and follow the pass procedure. Seems valid, but still cheesy feeling though.

ZanzerTem · Post by **ZanzerTem** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 6:04 pm

Not cheezy at all. The same modifiers apply, regardless of the distance, for a Quick Pass.

1) Passer still has to see if pass is accurate

2) Catcher still has to roll to catch

The EXACT same rolls are needed for both a zero or a 1 square pass.

Artificial Penguin · Post by **Artificial Penguin** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 8:56 pm

For what it's worth, this is a case where the rules and "common sense/the real world" can both come together. In (American) football, if the QB is close to a running back, he sometimes hands off, and sometimes does a "shovel pass" at a very short range.

Unfortunately, our league commish (who can't seem to resist getting creative with the rules), ruled that you CANNOT pass if you're adjacent to the receiver. I can't see any problem with a 0-square pass by my opponent, as it simply introduces a greater chance for failure into the equation.

If my opponent wants to take that extra chance to screw up in exchange for 1 SPP, it seems like a fair risk.

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 10:47 pm

Artificial Penguin wrote:Unfortunately, our league commish (who can't seem to resist getting creative with the rules), ruled that you CANNOT pass if you're adjacent to the receiver. I can't see any problem with a 0-square pass by my opponent, as it simply introduces a greater chance for failure into the equation.

If my opponent wants to take that extra chance to screw up in exchange for 1 SPP, it seems like a fair risk.

As already stated this is a perfectly legitimate and sometime necessary tactic.

Doesn't your commish's ruling just mean that players in your league throw the ball from 1 square away instead? I know that's what I would do in your leage, same dice just slightly more inconvenient (and a bit of a waste of time

)

Artificial Penguin · Post by **Artificial Penguin** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 10:51 pm

You're absolutely right that the commish's ruling doesn't drastically change anything, I just don't like taking choices away from players on principle.

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Mon Mar 03, 2003 10:58 pm

I quite agree. That's the point I was trying to make really, the ruling does not change anything particularly so why make it?

I think you already realise that though.

BlanchPrez · Post by **BlanchPrez** » Tue Mar 04, 2003 10:25 pm

Munkey wrote:Doesn't your commish's ruling just mean that players in your league throw the ball from 1 square away instead? I know that's what I would do in your leage, same dice just slightly more inconvenient (and a bit of a waste of time )

You know, that's an excelent point. Making a pass at one square or adjacent squares makes no difference, rules wise... and if a players wants to use their one pass action to throw to an adjacent player, I suppose he should have that option.

Chris

D'Arquebus · Post by **D'Arquebus** » Wed Mar 05, 2003 2:35 am

narkotic wrote

you cannot jump over empty squares

If by that you mean you cannot "Leap" over an empty square I would disagree. Reading the skill it makes no mention of that and in fact implies strongly that you can by saying "even if it is occupied".

As for the 0 square pass I have always been against it myself. That said I formed my opinion before the change to no free action for the handoff.

Also "real" world wise it did not make much sense. Now Artificial Penguin
has pointed out the "shovel pass" I will probably rule that you can do it.

Snew · Post by **Snew** » Wed Mar 05, 2003 3:01 am

We've always played that there is no minimun distance for a pass. If you want to roll another die for a SPP, it's cool.

Shadow_Dragon · Post by **Shadow_Dragon** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:51 am

WHy take away the right to do a quick pass because they're adjacent?
When the leap skill is employed for leaping empty squares it means you can jump emtpy squares that are ALSO tackle zones! THis way you make an agility roll instead of a possible two dodge roll in some cases!