Another pair of OFAB tries

Cervidal · Post by **Cervidal** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 3:09 pm

Some people complain that my last try at OFAB is too complicated, so I thought to simplify it by taking out the wierd game mechanic:

OFAB - When a player with this trait attempts an action, it must roll a d6 before starting its action. On a 2+, the player may take its action as normal. On a 1, the player leaves the pitch in search of something edible in the crowd. Immediately remove the player from the pitch. If the player was holding the ball, scatter the ball from the square the player was in before leaving. Leaving the pitch in this manner does not cause a turnover.
-----------------------------

Now instead of dealing with berserker vampires, you have a team whose numbers are going to dwindle in a hurry. Vampires won't be a team that can normally stall when trying to score.

An alternative that a fellow player came up with while we were discussing OFAB came up with was similar to the above:

-----------------------------
OFAB - Before a player with this trait declares an action, it must roll a d6 before starting its action. On a 2+, the player may take its action as normal. On a 1, the player has been overcome with hunger and needs a quick fix. To stay on the pitch, the OFAB player must now declare a block, blitz, or foul. In addition, the OFAB player must cause some form of injury as a result of his/her action. Failure to cause injury results in immediate removal of the vampire at the end of his/her action.
------------------------------

I think that was just about it. Neither of these introduce radical new rules, so they might be a acceptable to folks who don't like my first try at the skill.

Relborn · Post by **Relborn** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 3:12 pm

nice try Cervidal,

but I prefer my version, where an Vampire has to make a roll when being in the wide-zones to stay in the field an not move into the crowd ... IMO (okay I agree this is biased) that's the best solution to counter the power of the Vampires.

neoliminal · Post by **neoliminal** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 3:23 pm

I prefer the more flavourful original version.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 3:52 pm

neoliminal wrote:I prefer the more flavourful original version.

Me too. The Vampires teams now have 3 games under their belts and are starting to pick up skills. It will be interesting to see how they develop and if they stay balanced with the original COFAB rule.

So far the only teams the Vampires have manged to beat have been Halfings or another Vampire team. Round 4 of the MBBL will tell a lot as all 3 teams should be mixing it up with a wide range of races. So far the Vampires have only played against Dwarves, Vampires, and Halflings. The 3 games against Dwarves resulted in defeat for the Vampires.

The 3 COFAB Vampire teams are currently: 1-2, 2-1, 1-0.

Galak

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 5:56 pm

Hi all,
not that I'm a big fan of negatraits on the core of a basic roster, (as you probably know), but here is a version we used for a while.

Normal OFAB on a 4+ (no automatic pass on the next try if you fail this one).
If a vampire fails his roll, then he may kill a thrall in order to still be allowed to take the field for the drive.

Martin

(Just tossing things into the air).

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 7:10 pm

I definitely like the version that Galak is testing more than this. I just can't see where the claimed complexity lies. Heck - I consider my suggestion (that predates COFAB slightly) for vamp & thrall negatraits simple and it was definitely more complex than COFAB.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 9:53 pm

Please Galak, not more Dwarves

Anthony_TBBF · Post by **Anthony_TBBF** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 10:20 pm

I like this idea alot more. It's simple and to the point. I find the orginal version unnecessarily complex.

Cervidal · Post by **Cervidal** » Tue Jan 14, 2003 3:33 am

And that's exactly why I threw those ideas out there. I've had a chance to run the rules by a couple of coaches that I hadn't played against in awhile. It gave me a fresh outlook. Some of them liked my first try at OFAB, some didn't, but nearly all of them would have been willing to accept one of the above two.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Tue Jan 14, 2003 4:08 am

My heart goes with your original rule (seems more fun), but my mind goes with the simplified version.

I'm talking here from the point of view of someone who worked on the Oberwald for a couple years. The old wild animal skill lead to so many questions, it took at least a page or two to answer them all. I can forsee even more trouble in what is now called COFAB. That's why in Blood Bowl, simpler is better. There's enough complexity as it is.

I really like your original idea, but i think the first one presented here would be much easier to implement and would stop the flood of questioning of the rules before it even starts.