New OFAB

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 11:18 am

Okay futher thought.

I'd love to see the BB Mag #4 team with Cervidal's OFAB rule as orginially described (ie Thralls could die).

The rule is good because it will force the team to burn through TRR (rerolling failures), Vampires (unable to reach a Thrall), or Thralls (bitten).

I don't think the rule is that complex, and its DEFINITELY very much in the spirit of the team. I agree with Zombie that 0-6 Vamps MIGHT still be to much BUT if you stack the team with Vamps you are going to start losing something on the pitch at 1 a turn. Definitely needs testing ... on that note:

Hey JKL ... I need a BBRC member to approve testing since Torg is playing Vamps in the MBBL. Should we test the original roster which everyone hates or can I get a BBRC go ahead to try this in the MBBL? I can have it programmed into the PBeM tool by the next round no problem.

Galak

Furelli · Post by **Furelli** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 11:57 am

I really like this idea as well. Just to make sure we are all clear on the EXACT ruling for this i will repeat it as I understand it:

At start of Vamp action roll a dice:
IF roll=1 AND human thrall within Vamp MA
THEN move Vamp directly to the Thrall (using normal movement rules)
AND roll injury for thrall.
IF roll=1 AND human thrall NOT within Vamp MA
THEN place Vamp in reserves
AND suffer a turnover.
IF roll=2+
THEN Vamp acts normally (or as normal as a Vamp gets.)

This is a brilliant idea. It brings the downside to VCampires back onto the field and means its upto the coach to decide how he wants to play the trait.

Furelli.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 12:01 pm

yer thats not bad, bit harsh on the trall though, take it that this would cause a turnover as well as the trall would at least go down and is on the moving team?

Does it have to be the nearest thrall, have to randomise between 2 as near as each other, or could u choose to move to the easiest one to get 2, due to dodges etc. Though you might want to move to a harder to get to thrall in the sake of leaving an easier one to get to in a posistion that will be more useful in defence?

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 12:04 pm

Grumbledook wrote:Does it have to be the nearest thrall, have to randomise between 2 as near as each other, or could u choose to move to the easiest one to get 2, due to dodges etc.

IMO, it's supposed to be a negative trait, so the closest thrall it is, even if he's lying stunned and the vamp needs to make 6+ dodges to get to him.
Every thrall counts, right? Even ones who are lying - no need for them to stand when being sucked.

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 12:39 pm

BTW. Why don't we just start calling this COFAB (for "Cervidals OFAB"), so we don't have to refer it to as "new ofab" (as that could also mean the one in BBMag4) or as "cervidals new ofab".

Cervidal · Post by **Cervidal** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 1:59 pm

Here's why I didn't think a vamp sinking his fangs should cause a turnover, unless the bitten player is the ball carrier:

1) You're already suffering an automatic injury AND losing a player turn. Those are both pretty harsh penalties as is.

2) Thralls exist on the team specifically to be food. It's the 'natural' course for them to be bitten. Theme-fitting, really.

3) No other Negative Trait in Blood Bowl is an automatic turnover unless the player with the trait falls over or it causes a player on the negative player's team to cough up the ball. (I think)

Cervidal · Post by **Cervidal** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 2:03 pm

And... it should be to whatever Thrall the coach can get to, I think, even if it's to one that's further away and needs GFIs and whatever. It's already bad enough that the coach will lose either a vampire or a Thrall, as well as possibly the turn. Forcing a choice of Thrall on the coach would make the trait a mess more complicated than as written.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 2:20 pm

Grumbledook wrote:yer thats not bad, bit harsh on the trall though, take it that this would cause a turnover as well as the trall would at least go down and is on the moving team?

Not true you got the rule wrong ... let's try this again.

Cervidal's OFAB rule is:

If you try to take an action with a player with OFAB, roll a D6.

On a 2-6, the Vampire may take actions as normal.
On a 1, the Vampire is overcome by bloodlust and must feed on a thrall. This Vampire can only move this turn, must move towards a Thrall if he moves, and cannot declare any other actions. At the end of his movement the Vampire must be adjacent to a Thrall. If he fails to be adjacent to a Thrall by the end of his movement, he is placed in Reserves as he runs off the pitch to feed. This WILL result in a turnover. If the Vampire finishes his movement adjacent to a Thrall, make an injury roll for the Thrall to represent how much blood the Vampire drains. No matter the result of the injury roll, this WILL NOT result in a turnover, unless the Thrall was carrying the ball.

So there the rule ... to phrase it another way:
2-6 Vamp is fine
1 and cannot reach a Thrall: Vamp is Reserve, Turnover
1 and can reach a Thrall: Injury roll for Thrall, NO Turnover unless Thrall had the ball.

Like I said ... hands down .... best suggestion I've seen yet.

Galak

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 2:21 pm

Cervidal wrote:And... it should be to whatever Thrall the coach can get to, I think, even if it's to one that's further away and needs GFIs and whatever. It's already bad enough that the coach will lose either a vampire or a Thrall, as well as possibly the turn. Forcing a choice of Thrall on the coach would make the trait a mess more complicated than as written.

Agree with you on both counts Bud ... no turnover for injurying the Thrall and its whatever Thrall you want to try to feed of. This allows the Vampire coach so tactical decisions.

Galak

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 2:24 pm

Yer that seems to be best balanced we had so far.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 2:24 pm

Torg wrote:I don't mind the idea, sounds fine, but I think you are right about the BBRC probably not liking it.

Hey Torg we got 1 of them to like it ... now we just need 3 more ...

Galak

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 2:33 pm

Hey Cervidal .... one question/thought

Do you need to add a MUST try to move to a Thrall component to the new OFAB.

Otherwise, if my ball carrying Vamp 8 squares away from a TD fails ... I'm going to run for the End Zone and score rather than try for a Thrall.

This is a pretty negative trait, but this is a two turn scoring team and I'm thinking that without a MUST try in the wording that it will have a fairly easy escape mechanism.

Galak

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 2:35 pm

Could you not just move a thrall to the endzone first?

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 2:56 pm

Grumbledook wrote:Could you not just move a thrall to the endzone first?

I'd be fine with that tactic. That would just be plain GOOD Vampire coaching. But running the Vamp into the End Zone with no Thralls there to get out of the failed OFAB roll wouldn't work for me.

Definitely need a MUST try to move to a Thrall line in there ... I'll edit the above to see what it looks like.

Galak

neoliminal · Post by **neoliminal** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 3:02 pm

GalakStarscraper wrote:Hey JKL ... I need a BBRC member to approve testing since Torg is playing Vamps in the MBBL. Should we test the original roster which everyone hates or can I get a BBRC go ahead to try this in the MBBL? I can have it programmed into the PBeM tool by the next round no problem.

You're putting power in my hands that I don't actually have, Galak. I like this idea and I'll support it's testing, but the current experimental rules were written by JJ. If all you're looking for is a nod that some BBRC member likes the idea, then yes, I like the idea.

Talk Fantasy Football

New OFAB

Biting shouldn't cause a turnover