Tricky TTM Query

cleminho · Post by **cleminho** » Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:14 pm

I all see your point.
But, whether he has the ball or not, the goblin doesn't land, in any case, when he is sent into the crowd, therefore, I disagree with people who say that it is only turnover if he has the ball and we have to ignore rest.
It is exactly the same as when someone says that a ttm with a goblin without the ball is fumbled, it is turnover because there is no turnover and the goblin falls over. In the crowd, as he is injured, he is obviously knocked over beforehand, and it is an official turnover. Because, he DOES NOT LAND. If you agree that, with the ball or not, the goblin does not land, you cannot disagree that it is a turnover in any case and tell me it is only a TO if he was carrying the ball.

cleminho · Post by **cleminho** » Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:16 pm

cleminho wrote:it is turnover because there is no turnover and the goblin falls over.

You should read landing instead here.

Joaquim · Post by **Joaquim** » Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:23 pm

Cleminho:

The problem is if the thrower is a Troll, with Allways Hungry...
Then the goblin can fall, not landing, even knock out a fellow player of his team.... and that isn't a TO!!

So, for me in TTM there are only 2 ways of getting a TO: with the ball or a fumble - and the fumble I don't know why!!!

Note: with the ball it's irrelevant where the ball ends, even if it ends being catched by a player from his team!...

cleminho · Post by **cleminho** » Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:29 pm

Joaquim wrote:Cleminho:

The problem is if the thrower is a Troll, with Allways Hungry...
Then the goblin can fall, not landing, even knock out a fellow player of his team.... and that isn't a TO!!

So, for me in TTM there are only 2 ways of getting a TO: with the ball or a fumble - and the fumble I don't know why!!!

Note: with the ball it's irrelevant where the ball ends, even if it ends being catched by a player from his team!...

I totally do agree with that. But "always hungry" is even another matter, not linked with the "thrown into the crowd" thing we are talking about since the beginning. With your opinion, what happens with an ogre (who has not always hungry)?
The fumble is a turnover only because there is no landing roll and the rule clearly says "falls over", which is an official TO.

Joaquim · Post by **Joaquim** » Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:49 pm

But Allways Hungry only happens in a TTM.... so it's linked.
All in all I would go for what I think it's the spirit of the game, not for the wording of the rules....

What I'm becoming very affraid is: a 2k pages rulebook.... wich nobody will read and I won't understand...

cleminho · Post by **cleminho** » Tue Sep 16, 2003 1:20 pm

Joaquim wrote:But Allways Hungry only happens in a TTM.... so it's linked.

It is linked with TTM, but not with a the "thrown into the crowd" subject.

All in all I would go for what I think it's the spirit of the game, not for the wording of the rules....

I agree, but we also need to take care of certain specificities.

What I'm becoming very affraid is: a 2k pages rulebook.... wich nobody will read and I won't understand...

I agree.

cleminho · Post by **cleminho** » Tue Sep 16, 2003 1:22 pm

Sorry, it is better like this?

cleminho wrote:
Joaquim wrote:But Allways Hungry only happens in a TTM.... so it's linked.

It is linked with TTM, but not with a the "thrown into the crowd" subject.

All in all I would go for what I think it's the spirit of the game, not for the wording of the rules....

I agree, but we also need to take care of certain specificities.

What I'm becoming very affraid is: a 2k pages rulebook.... wich nobody will read and I won't understand...
I agree.

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Wed Sep 17, 2003 6:05 am

Hi all,
I pretty much agree with Cleminho

Joaquim, I disagree with your point about Always Hungry.
Milo said: Read the rules. Follow the TTM rules where you can, and the basic rules when the special rules do not apply.

Always Hungry describes a specific situation with specific rules. No more, no less.
The TTM rules state that a failed landing roll without the ball does not constitute a TO. No more, no less.

The rest is up to the basic rules.
Martin

Joaquim · Post by **Joaquim** » Wed Sep 17, 2003 10:44 am

Well, the problem is that english isn't my language... so I think I have extra troubles sometimes.... (and give some to anyone trying to read my posts...

)

But the question is: how hard would it be to write "this is a turnover" after the fumble part? Or "if the thrown player doesn't land in a empty square then this is a turnover" before or after the landing rules?...

The logic is: they describe some situations (fumble, hit another player, hit the crowd and landing) and the only turn out is modified not by the previous situation but by holding the ball.

So, to me, the consequence it's described after the landing just because that happens to be the last situation - not the only relevant. Specially when you think as easy it would be to describe a diferent consequence foe the others situations...

And, since this isn't a pass (even if the big take the Pass Action) I don't know why should a fumble be a TO....

The problem here is reading "all book" or "for sections".... if you take the "all book" aproach then, without any doubt plasmoid is right...
But if you read "this section".... you must admit that the "player fall or fumbles are TO" are not applicable....

And everybody knows that it's hard enought for a section to make sense by itself, asking this to all book is just insane!!!

What annoys me isn't the rules interpretation (well, that too

)... it's that in this case it was so easy to avoid confusion..!!!...

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Wed Sep 17, 2003 10:49 am

all fumbles are a turnover you don't need to use the landing part of anything like that

if the thrower or a ttm player fumbles its a turnover

Joaquim · Post by **Joaquim** » Wed Sep 17, 2003 10:54 am

And... throwing the ball to the crowd? is that legal?!?

It isn't such a stupid thing to do, iof you are a little halfling, holding the ball, surrounded by dwarfs... in your endzone!!!

Perhaps I should start another thread.....

Babs · Post by **Babs** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 8:38 pm

Have you all been reading your rulebooks?

As long as the thrown player lands in an empty square,
then the next step is to make a roll to see if he manages
to land on his feet (see Landing below). If the thrown
player ends up out of bounds then they are beaten up by
the crowd just as if they had been pushed out of bounds.
If they land on top of another player, then both they and
the other player are knocked over, and the player that
they hit scatters one square in a random direction.

The two incidents 'out of bounds' and 'hit another player' are linked in this passage.

Why? Because in both instances, a landing roll is unnecessary. So let me ask you this question.

If a TTM player, without the ball, hits another player - is it a Turnover?

No it's not. By pure logic therefore, a player thrown out of bounds without the ball is not a TO - by looking at the rulebook and the way it is phrased.

(Arguing like this was the reason why I was asked to be on the rules committee in the first place,)

Post by **Dave** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 9:46 pm

Babs wrote:(Arguing like this was the reason why I was asked to be on the rules committee in the first place,)

ah .. so going on like that .. if you don't argue like that you won't ??

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Fri Sep 26, 2003 9:00 pm

Babs,
I've read the passage, and it didn't sway me.

The passage states that if you land in an empty square then make a landing roll.
The rules for landing rolls then go on to state that a failed landing roll is not a turn over.

If you land in an occupied square or crowd you don't get a landing roll, so the rules for landing rolls do not apply. Why would they?

Martin

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Fri Sep 26, 2003 9:13 pm

plasmoid wrote:Babs,
I've read the passage, and it didn't sway me.

The passage states that if you land in an empty square then make a landing roll.
The rules for landing rolls then go on to state that a failed landing roll is not a turn over.

If you land in an occupied square or crowd you don't get a landing roll, so the rules for landing rolls do not apply. Why would they?

Martin

Babs after reading the whole TTM thread ... I'm with plasmoid et all. Failing a landing roll is not a turnover. No landing roll = turnover. IE fumbles, being eaten, landing on another player, and landing in the crowd would all be turnovers as there is no landing roll actually made. You cannot use the failed landing roll=no turnover rule, if no landing roll was made in the first place.

And Babs, the Hot List is closed to new entries ... but this might be one clarification question, you might want to add in to the 2003 Review. If it doesn't get clarified, I'll add it as the first item on the Hot List for 2004.

Galak