Passing and intercepting

[Mestari]

Why is the intercept roll still made before the pass roll? (do I hear someone saying "it's not brok...").
Still, a far more sensible intercept procedure (that's been succesfully used in our league for about 6 years):

1.declare pass
2.Move Pass blockers
3.roll for pass
4.roll for intercept (if somebody can and the pass wasn't fumbled)
5.roll for catch (if a player can catch it)

An example to support my case:
Let's say a human lineman is making a pass, surrounded by evil wood elves. The odds are: 1-4 fumble, 5 inaccurate, 6 accurate. Also, they have no RR available. So out of 24 passes, the odds for different scenarios are:
16/24 fumble
4 /24 inaccurate
4 /24 accurate

I, the coach of the wood elves, have a AG5 Catch line-elf ready to intercept.
Under the original rules, the possibilities for different outcomes of the pass suddenly become:
18/24 intercepted
4 /24 fumble
1 /24 inaccurate
1 /24 accurate
which is pretty far from the original, isn't it?

With the rules suggested above, the odds are:
16/24 fumble
6 /24 intercepted
1 /24 inaccurate
1 /24 accurate

Which is a lot closer to the original odds, with simply the 75% interceptions added for passes where the ball actually flies somewhere so that it can be intercepted.

What do you think? Makes more sense, doesn't it?

[DoubleSkulls]

We play exactly the same way.

[plasmoid]

Hi Mestari,
we used to play the same way too. But now we've stopped.
Actually we played like this: Roll for interceptions after the pass roll. If the pass is in accurate, then the intercept roll is at -1 rather than -2.

We did it to have more interceptions (we like those )
But they didn't happen.
It felt like we got more fumbles instead.
So now, we're changing back.

Martin

[Zy-Nox]

1.declare pass
2.Move Pass blockers
3.roll for pass
4.roll for intercept (if somebody can and the pass wasn't fumbled)
5.roll for catch (if a player can catch it)

Thats exactly the way we do it .
We could never work out why the intercept was actualy rolled before the pass,I'm sure there is a good one though,but we like it this way.

[McDeth]

must admit why is the intercept roll made before the pass, i mean what if the throw is a fumble how, is thaqt gonna be intercepted?

[Anthony_TBBF]

We play that way too, makes more sense.

[Mestari]

We play that way too, makes more sense.

A lot more, IMHO. Especially when the chances to fumble are high, as seen from the data in my original message.

I can dimly remember a debate around this some years ago on the bbowl-l ... just can't remember on which side Chet was
Anyhow I think BBRC should consider changing the rule.

[Acerak]

If you force the player to throw first, you're going to have fewer chances to intercept the ball because of pre-INT fumbles. I can't say that this is why the rule was set up like it was, but fewer chances to intercept is a definite byproduct of such a change. And some argue that interceptions are already rare enough.

Further, there's the question of who is eligible to intercept if a pass is thrown inaccurately, because now a Pass Blocker or would-be interceptor may find himself out from under the range ruler. Should you then re-measure the trajectory? Allow new Pass Blocks? Or what, exactly?

-Chet

[SixFootDwarf]

1.declare pass
2.Move Pass blockers
3.roll for pass
4.roll for intercept (if somebody can and the pass wasn't fumbled)
5.roll for catch (if a player can catch it)

That's the way I've always done it, and I thought that's the way it's supposed to be done. Either way, no problem has ever come up from doing it like this, so I'm not gonna change now.

[Dangerous Dave]

As a lot of Leagues seem to, we play that you cannot intercept a fumble too.


Chet said:-

If you force the player to throw first, you're going to have fewer chances to intercept the ball because of pre-INT fumbles.


I say... so what! If the passer fumbles it I am already happy and will happily pass up the interception chance.


Chet follows up with:-


Further, there's the question of who is eligible to intercept if a pass is thrown inaccurately, because now a Pass Blocker or would-be interceptor may find himself out from under the range ruler. Should you then re-measure the trajectory? Allow new Pass Blocks? Or what, exactly?


Sure I understand the point but at the point of making the interception, you haven't made the scatter rolls for the inaccurate pass. So for all you know it could be short, long, wide or even "accurate" (scatters back to the square you were trying to pass to). I don't really think that this is a good reason for not changing the order of the rolls. I mean at the moment, a player trys to intercept before the thrower has passed it! - Logic says that this must be harder than a player intercepting an inaccurate throw!



Dave

[Mestari]

If you force the player to throw first, you're going to have fewer chances to intercept the ball because of pre-INT fumbles.

True. But I can't see a reason why 16/24 odds of fumbling turn into 4/24 odds of fumbling if some elf is trying to intercept the pass, as in the example that I sent.
Interceptions are rare, but they should be. If you want them to be frequent, get that AG5/catch/pass block line-elf, and watch it rack up interceptions.

Further, there's the question of who is eligible to intercept if a pass is thrown inaccurately, because now a Pass Blocker or would-be interceptor may find himself out from under the range ruler. Should you then re-measure the trajectory? Allow new Pass Blocks? Or what, exactly?

I don't think this is really a question, or at least it has never come up in our league. Just use the intended flight path (the range ruler) of the ball for deciding who can intercept. Roll the scatter rolls after the interception.
And don't say that this makes no sense - the suggested rules change requires a lot less imagination than the original rule where you roll for the interception first.

[Acerak]

And don't say that this makes no sense - the suggested rules change requires a lot less imagination than the original rule where you roll for the interception first.

I challenge you to imagine a scenario in which you intercept a fumbled pass.

Sorry, guys, but "It ain't broke..." is probably gonna win the day on this one. We do have the Game Designer on the BBRC. It's won the day before; it'll likely win the day again when it's over. The rules are rather clear on this, so logic aside - and again, it's not even possible to "intercept a fumbled pass" - the rule works just fine as is. I'm not saying it won't change, but I am saying your leagues seem to be working just fine with a house rule that other leagues don't need. The simpler method is already in place.

-Chet

[Mestari]

- -

Well... end of discussion it seems, although apart from the 'it aint broke'-argument there has been nothing against the change, while the change itself is pretty well founded and justified.
Also, I can't see many people who'd object to the change - quite the contrary. I hope that you guys honestly consider this in the BBRC.

[Jared]

True. But I can't see a reason why 16/24 odds of fumbling turn into 4/24 odds of fumbling if some elf is trying to intercept the pass, as in the example that I sent.
Interceptions are rare, but they should be. If you want them to be frequent, get that AG5/catch/pass block line-elf, and watch it rack up interceptions.

because if there is a 75%chance of the agi5 we intercepting the ball then suddenly the int happens first 75% of all throws get intercepted meaning that the ball flies to the WE regardless of the pass, so suddenly i was going to fumble then the ball magically flies into hte hands of someone inbetween me and the perosn i was throwing to

the rule is broken, round my way we always declare interceptor pre throw but work it out when the pass is known to be a non fumble,

[Yavatol]

I think I read somewhere that there were two reasons. First reason (allready mentioned in passing) is to make interceptions more frequent. Second reason is you don't loose team rerolls on passes that are intercepted.