Moderator: TFF Mods
Code: Select all
. . . . 2 . . .
.+.+.+1+.+3+.+.
. . V . . . 4 .
. . . . . . T .
Hey if Chet can approve changing the Necro team to a better version to actually use, you can approve a different version of OFAB.neoliminal wrote: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.
) Any state would be fine ... keeps the skill simpler.neoliminal wrote:Couple of clarifying questions:
1) Can you move next to a stunned or prone thrall? Or does it have to be a standing thrall?
Agreed2) If two Vampire teams are playing, can I drain my opponents Thrall? (in otherwords, we should specify that it's your own teams thrall only.)
No ... adding MUST move towards the Thrall solves the majority of the problem with this issue. Since the intent is clear. I don't think it needs to be in the trait ... adding the sentence.3) If the vampire has the ball, and he rolls a 1, what happens if he runs into the endzone on his way to the Thrall??
Code: Select all
A Vampire may not score a TD during a failed OFAB movement score unless doing so placing them adjacent to a Thrall.Code: Select all
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; otherwise on a 1, the Vampire is overcome by bloodlust and must feed on a thrall. This Vampire can only move this turn, cannot declare any other actions, and cannot score a TD unless doing so placing him adjacent to a standing, prone, or stunned Thrall. At the end of his movement the Vampire must be adjacent to a Thrall from his team. 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. Otherwise, make an injury roll for the adjacent 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.That would work for me. Since dropping the ball is NOT a turnover ... this works very well. Thanks John.neoliminal wrote:What if it read something like this:
OFAB:
A player with this characteristic must occasionally feed on the blood of the living. At the start of any action, roll a d6. On a 2+ the player may carry out the action as normal. On a '1', however, the player is overcome with a desire for blood and must make a Feeding Action. A player taking a Feeding Action may never hold the ball. If they start a feeding action while holding the ball, they immediately drop it. If they enter a square with the ball, they will automatically fail to pick it up.
Feeding Action: The player may move a number of squares equal to their MA. If the player ends his action standing adjacent to a Thrall from his own team, immediately roll for unmodified injury on that Thrall (the injury to the Thrall will never result in a turnover). If the player does not end his movement next to a Thrall from his own team, then he runs into the Reserves box trying to find pretty maiden groupie to quench his thirst. Place him in the reserves box, this is a turnover.
Also, so that it can be a better comparison, I'll have one of my friends make a BBM4 Vamp team, so they can both be compared in a league setting. My vote is the one from BB Mag #4. I honestly think Cervidal OFAB will make that team work. Yah, the Vampire Lord is a great player, but I think that all you need is this version of OFAB to make the team okay. At least thats what I'm planning on testing in the MBBL.Furelli wrote:Right. I think many of us are agreed that this is a brilliant change to OFAB. Can we now clarify the team list that will be tested as:
a) The one from BBMag #4
b) The list from BBMag #4 but with only 0-4 vamps.
c) The list from BBMag #4 but the Vamp lord ALSO has OFAB
d) Something else.
Furelli.
plasmoid wrote:I really like this!
I think that on any other big guy, this would be too negative/too much. BUT we're dealing with big guys that get to use RRs, have obscene stats (and skills and skill access), and that can be fielded in numbers that exceed any other big guy. Something needed to be done to rein them in, and make the team playable. So far, this is the most fair-seeming, and interesting method I've seen to make the team palatable.GalakStarscraper wrote: Even Martin likes it ... well there we go ... Martin and I never agree and JKL and I disagree more than agree .... let make it official ..... oh wait ...
Chet hates the idea. Thank goodness there are 5 other BBRC member eh?
Caveat .... normally I agree with Chet's thoughts .. he thinks the skill is too word and too much and too negative. I hear where he's coming from, but I just don't agree with any of the 3 toos.
