Are wizards useful or not? Opinions sought

[silverback_guerilla]

In the rules forum, regarding the lightning template, someone wrote:

Thanks for clearing that up, guys. I guess wizards really are a fairly lame use of 50k gold now...

I'm asking "Is that true, in your experience?"

Never used it myself, but here's my take on it:

Fireball looks OK. If your opponent has his players in a tight "cage" then you could conceivably knock three or four over, if they had AG3. Dwarfs and others with low AG even more so. Useful for Gobbos, Elves or other teams that don't hit hard.

Zap: A 50% chance of turning his best star player into a toad, not bad - if it works. Best against a team that relies on a Star Player or Big Guy.

Lightning Bolt: Better than fireball for taking out high-AG players that like to run up the sideline, like elves, especially if your players don't run very quickly. [RANT](Or if the freakin' Orc player is standing his Blitzer on the edge of the End Zone, running out the clock and smashing your elf players some more in the meantime. Score or die, you greenskinned blighter! Grrr!)[/RANT]

In a in important game, like a semi-final or final, and used at a critical point, it could swing the game. Useful enough to justify $50K at any rate.

[Pink Horror]

The usefulness of the wizard depends on your team and your opponent. Against lizardmen or dwarfs, that fireball could be very effective. The lightning bolt, now that it can only be used at the beginning of your turn, is effectively an extra blitz for breaking up an agility team's timing.

What else can you get for 50k that will make an impact on the game? Well, if you're chaos, orcs, or goblins, you have secret weapon options that can be more cost effective. If you're Chaos Dwarfs, I think you're better off with the wizard than the blunderbuss. For just 60k a human team can rent Mighty Zug to hold the line. Of course, all these other options require empty roster spots, which you may not have.

Spending your cash regularly on TR reducers could be the difference between a bloated team handing out handicaps and a slim, efficient team designed for longevity. Wizards, along with freebooters, can give you an edge in close ballgames while maintaining control of team growth. What can be lame about that?



Pink Horror

[Ghost of Pariah]

Gotta agree with the Pink One here.
Not only are the wizards effective is used correct (and with a good blessing from Nuffle) but how fun is it when Griff Oberwald turn into a frog and then is killed by a goblin? That alone is worth 50K!

[Mestari]

Still, wizards are rarely taken (contrary evidence, anyone?). Mainly because:

-When teams can afford them, they need something else too (players, RR's) more.

-When the team would buy them, their income is too low (and what they manage to gather is usually spent replacing casualties and retired players).

Lowering the wizard cost to 40k might be an answer, what do you think?

[Deathwing]

Never liked them myself. Remember back in the bad old days when the Dungeonbowl champs could stop two TDs a game? Getting them off the roster was a major plus in my eyes...and 50K to freeboot isn't a back solution.
Wouldn't mind seeing them on the pitch either, but I'm happier with that as a house rule. Wizards intervening in a game should be an infrequent occurence IMO, and not really a no-brainer choice for every team out there.

[GalakStarscraper]

I agree its only house rules material, but I love the on-pitch rules for wizards. Nothing like taking a 120k AV 6 Wood Elf Lineman wizard and snapping his spine like a twig ... ahhhhh ... the sweet sounds of Blood Bowl in the morning.

Galak

[tchatter]

The REBBL will be starting in about a week. And we are using the LRB rules pretty strictly. It will be interesting to see if anyone takes a wizard. And how they work in practice. We have two Undead teams, two dwarves so we'll see how things pan out.

We are also using the Star Players as described in the LRB, and I will be tracking their injuries as well.

I do agree with Galak though, the online spellcasters and the spells that have been created for them are VERY cool.

[Pink Horror]

Mestari, yes, wizards are rarely taken now. I chalk this up to old-school Blood Bowl thinking more than thoughtful strategy. How often would you ever need to purchase a player, and when could you ever need to purchase a re-roll? Once your roster is 13 deep you need to start weighing in the negatives of player purchases. Is another permanent roster member the best thing you can do with your cash?

Buying a temporary team member is almost like buying fan factor, because it increases future income. You also get a much larger boost for your next game than you would by spending the same money on a permanent player. If you control your team growth aggressively, you'll never hit that wall and your income will never be too low. Don't waste time shooting for a long-term, 300+ TR team - it's better to have an efficient 200 TR team.



Pink Horror

[Coach Barry]

The shouldn't have wizards, they distort the game, and sometimes they simply ruin a well planned couple of moves with a lucky spell and ... xazam... its not BB anymore its wizardbowl. I honestly don't like it.

[Colin]

I would have to agree. I have never played with wizards just on that account. I think that it was silly to have them as part of the team, standing on the sidelines just to cast a spell at the right moment to ruin a play. Seemed too much like cheating to me and I thought it made more sense if wizards were banned from BB. With the freeboot rule, it's not so bad, I can probably accept that, but I will still not play with them.

[nouge]

I was the one who originally said that wizards were a lame way to spend 50k, but on reflection I'm beginning to change my mind, mainly due to the psychological effects of having the wizards spell ready to go.

Two of the spells are reasonably unreliable (fireball and zap!), but the lightning bolt spell pretty much always works, which effectively restricts the ball carrier to the centre of the field, or forces the opposition to position a covering player to protect against a possible bolt. Even the threat of a fireball may affect the opponents play, forcing them to spread out their box more than they would otherwise.

All in all, anything that inhibits the opponents play style is a good thing, IMO. Since I'm currently playing the Undead I dont have the option of trying out the new wizard thing, but I will certainly be giving them a go in the next league I play.

[Mestari]

wizards are rarely taken now. I chalk this up to old-school Blood Bowl thinking more than thoughtful strategy.

Can't say I disagree with you, Pink H. TR control is an important team management aspect, and what could be a better way to loose those 5 points of TR than to polymorph them into a lightning bolt that strikes the opponents ball-carrier.

The 40k cost that I suggested... it could be too low given the usefulness of the wizard. And I can't say I'd strongly support that price suggestion should it meet any resistance. Some people might like it, though.

[Pallino]

In our league we use strictly the rule about wizard.
In 5 Match just one time a wizard is been hired!
I think this is a good thing.

By the way, the wizard was hired by the coach of the Caos Team vs my Dwarves. He make my Ogre (Jail) the "Zap" spell.
But jumping around his Beastmen I save the Ogre and Win the Game!
But in that moment the Zap spell was terrible

bye

[silverback_guerilla]

I have to admit that I am new to Blood Bowl and have never played under any rules except LRB 1.3, but under the current rules I don't see problems.

Wizards are a one-shot wonder, and somewhat unreliable. Once he's used he loses any threat value. It puts a bit more pressure on the opposing coach, which is good - it's another thing for him to worry about. If my opponent loses the mind game, he'll lose on the pitch.

On the other hand, if I am facing a team that's freebooted a wizard I'll factor him into my calculations until he gets used, but I'll try not to be intimidated by him. Some people prefer the Wizard on the Pitch rules because they can "do something about" the Wizard. "Doing something about" an opposing player does not necessarily mean putting him in the Injury box. Simply taking the possible effect into account can be enough.

Sure, lightning bolt can fry a runner heading down the sideline, but equally it could knock down an opposing player guarding the wide zones. I am sure a creative thinker could find ways to make use of them. Like the Kick-Off table, it makes the game a bit less of a chess game and IMHO more fun. They add a little flavour, a little more strategy. I don't think it's useless, unfair or unsporting. Just a nifty option.

[gallowin]

What about helping to keep your team rating down? If you are freebooting a wizard at 50K per game it helps keep your team rating down. I've lowered my team rating by 25 pts this season and one reason was using a wizard when I could.