Woody's Sticky FAQ inaccuracies

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Nov 06, 2002 9:43 pm

Babs wrote:Jervis' .sig file for many years went "It ain't official until it's in print". Going by that motto, although I have the all in one Handbook .pdf files, I'll be quoting the Annual as the official source until I get my hard copy.

That's all well and good, but it's not very helpful if the offical printed material isn't available after a relatively short time (BB Mag #3 being a case in point here in the UK). I don't know about MO, but the Annual was not available in any of the 4 GW stores I class as local.

Pink Horror · Post by **Pink Horror** » Thu Nov 07, 2002 7:05 am

Well, there may be such a hypothetical thing as a Big Guy Star Player, thanks to a fluff section of the rules, but there are no Star Players with the Big Guy trait. So, I don't think there are any Big Guy Star Players at the moment.

However, it's nice to see that you guys have left the rules open for such a creature, in the unlikely event that you create one.

Pink Horror

Babs · Post by **Babs** » Sat Nov 09, 2002 11:23 pm

Pink,

I agree with you about the possibility. It is nice, however I also tend to agree in that it is very unlikely to happen (unless all stars are made as such).

Darkson,

I also agree that it is a crying shame that printed stuff is so hard to get. It's also losing money for GW as far as I'm concerned. I for instance am unable to get BBMag#4 as the post never delivered mine!!! I have a sneaking suspicion that BBmag, annual etc. won't be available in the GW stores until after the 'new' Blood Bowl board game is available in store.

Galak,

Didn't mean to really 'talk you down' except to clarify that your position was, although perhaps helpful, not consistent with the paradigm of the ruleset. The 'fluff' (if you want to call that line fluff, the earlier stufff certainly is) backs up the paradigm.

If you want to start a new thread about officiality - happy to. Really my preference for quoting is something I do personally rather than something I've been directed to do, for example. The LRB is always changing, by definition, hence I think it's more clear to quote from something static.

In terms of respecting you,(although you never really questioned this, it's implied I think) there is no doubt that you are one of the bigest BB shakers and movers in the world. Quite frankly I'm not sure why _you_ aren't one of the BBRC. I always respect your opinion and weigh it up very carefully before replying. We're all fallible, and me more than many.

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Sat Nov 09, 2002 11:39 pm

Babs: last time I raised a point with Andy, I got this in reply (posted elsewhere);
"I agree that the wording is confusing and could be better written. Unfortunately the Rulebook has now gone off to the printers, and I can't change the LRB as that would cause confusion. The best thing I can do is address it in my next editorial."
So the LRB, as it stands at the moment, has to be identical to the new rulebook, and as such, has to be considered the definitive source.

Getting back to the original point, if you'd like to add an addendum to the FAQ (and Chet's reply) to the effect that you can freeboot Star Players, I'd be more than happy to add it. Just so everybody's clear.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sun Nov 10, 2002 12:37 am

Babs wrote:
Galak,
In terms of respecting you,(although you never really questioned this, it's implied I think) there is no doubt that you are one of the bigest BB shakers and movers in the world.

God lord, I don't think I'd go that far ... I'm sure that would give guys like Zombie a heart attack if it were true. There was no question of respect there Babs, ya got me on that argument fair and square. The LRB has the line of text to back your position. I didn't think it was there. There might have been some sour grapes in my last post because of having to admit I'd lost an argument that I really didn't want to lose (ie I believe that the Stars should be completely positionless). You won the argument and I wasn't the greatest sport about it. Also your position about the LRB not be official because it was virtual vs printed just completely threw me as I'm still not sure how you could say that, so I lost and argument and was mentally trying to deal with a BBRC member tell me the LRB wasn't official since it was virtual ... I think the two factors messed with my ability to post like a gentleman.

Trust me Babs, I'm a true supporter of the BBRC and the Review process. I'm not afraid to "throw" down with the BBRC, but that's because I'm not afriad to put my money where my mouth is and test and try also.

So don't worry, I think I was a little off-balance in the last post. Truthfully, I'm just glad you come to visit. Usually we only hear comments from JKL and Chet ... makes it difficult to know which way the breeze is blowing when we only have 2/7 of the BBRC to communicate directly with.

Galak

Babs · Post by **Babs** » Sun Nov 10, 2002 2:52 am

Deathwing / Woody stated:

So the LRB, as it stands at the moment, has to be identical to the new rulebook, and as such, has to be considered the definitive source.

If that's true - all's well and good. I think I'll kick off a new thread to discuss officiality anyway as I'm sure lots of people will be interested.

Galak said about being a BB mover and shaker:

I'm sure that would give guys like Zombie a heart attack if it were true.

Well, I'm not sure that a Heart attack would do anything to a Zombie

Truthfully, I'm just glad you come to visit. Usually we only hear comments from JKL and

Hopefully It's more than just a visit. With the mailing list extinct, I have nowhere else to post easily, so I will need to resgn myself to a message board like this.

I do prefer to receive emails however - but I guess I'm just old school (which I think you've probably seen already).

Emails are nice because I can download them and log off, reply and log back on - which doesn't tie up my phone line (or cost in a per hour internet connection)!

Babs · Post by **Babs** » Sun Nov 10, 2002 3:27 am

Woody offered:

Getting back to the original point, if you'd like to add an addendum to the FAQ (and Chet's reply) to the effect that you can freeboot Star Players, I'd be more than happy to add it. Just so everybody's clear.

Thanks Woody - I think that that would be helpful, as the original could be misinterpreted by a newbie...

Pink Horror stated:

there are no Star Players with the Big Guy trait. So, I don't think there are any Big Guy Star Players at the moment.

I think you missed the point Pink. There are _lots_ of Big Guy Star Players. They just don't follow the 'Big Guy' trait rules, because they follow the 'Star Player' rules instead (they take precedence).

It is interesting to note at this point that Thrud has Bone Head.

Galak stated,

Usually we only hear comments from JKL and Chet ... makes it difficult to know which way the breeze is blowing when we only have 2/7 of the BBRC to communicate directly with.

They are no doubt the most prolific posters of the BBRC. However, they most certainly will give a distorted view on the direction of the BBRC. That would be true of any 2 of the BBRC.

In my opinion, both John and Chet are now 'liberal' Blood Bowlers. I am definately a 'conservative'. It is interesting to see that I think Chet has moved from 'conservative' to 'liberal' over the last two years.

It is good to have a balance of these types on the BBRC.

Anthony_TBBF · Post by **Anthony_TBBF** » Sun Nov 10, 2002 4:39 am

I think you missed the point Pink. There are _lots_ of Big Guy Star Players. They just don't follow the 'Big Guy' trait rules, because they follow the 'Star Player' rules instead (they take precedence).

It is interesting to note at this point that Thrud has Bone Head.

Yes, there are a bunch of Stars that you could describe as "Big Guys" but using such a definition is misleading (an unfortunate remnant of old rule sets). A Big Guy is clearly a player with the Big Guy racial characteristic. The fact that Thrud has Bonehead is irrelevant.

Babs · Post by **Babs** » Mon Nov 11, 2002 12:02 pm

Anthony claimed:

Yes, there are a bunch of Stars that you could describe as "Big Guys" but using such a definition is misleading (an unfortunate remnant of old rule sets). A Big Guy is clearly a player with the Big Guy racial characteristic.

Some people just don't get it yet! Argh!

The Blood Bowl Rulebooks DO describe a bunch of stars as "Big Guys". It's only as misleading as the alternative, having some ogres Big Guys and other ogres not!

A Big Guy is clearly Something More than just a Big Guy racial characteristic. Big Guys are, by definition, Big Guys. They are Big. And they play Blood Bowl.

So here's the lowdown. All players with the 'Big Guy' racial characteristic are Big Guys. But some Big Guys do not have the 'Big Guy' racial Characteristic. Therefore, by logic, the racial Characteristic is a subset of the group 'a big guy'.

Therefore, by logic, Big Guys are something more than just some racial characteristic.

Anthony_TBBF · Post by **Anthony_TBBF** » Mon Nov 11, 2002 4:54 pm

Therefore, by logic, Big Guys are something more than just some racial characteristic.

I think you've been spending too much time in the sun

Anthony_TBBF · Post by **Anthony_TBBF** » Mon Nov 11, 2002 4:58 pm

But some Big Guys do not have the 'Big Guy' racial Characteristic.

Then don't call them Big Guys, it's misleading. You seem to be the only one not getting it...

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:23 pm

Anthony_TBBF wrote:
But some Big Guys do not have the 'Big Guy' racial Characteristic.
Then don't call them Big Guys, it's misleading. You seem to be the only one not getting it...

As I've said above .... my thoughts exactly.

Galak

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:50 pm

I think the problem (I may just be totally lost) is that if I'm explaining the rules to a newbie.

Me: "This treeman is a Big Guy. He can't use team re-rolls etc."

Newbie: "OK, I understand that. Who's this?"

Me: "Thats Deeproot Strongbranch, a Big Guy Star Player Treeman."

Newbie: "Ah, so he can't use re-rolls either!"

Me: " Um... yes he can, as he's a star player"

Newbie: "But you just said Big Guys can't use Re-rolls."

Me: " Yes, but he's a Star Player as well, so he can"

Newbie: "Make your mind up. This is to confusing. I'm off to play M:TG"

Ok, maybe it won't happen exactly like that, but you get the gist.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:55 pm

I think most will get confused by treeman ;]

"what a man thats a tree or a tree thats a man?"

Xynok · Post by **Xynok** » Tue Nov 12, 2002 3:55 pm

Me: Ok, I play this card during your turn...

Magic_Guy: Right, its on the stack, and I play this permanents ability, also now on the stack.

Me: Umm, so what happens?

Magic_Guy: Well, since we know the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, and by taking into consideration that all falling objects accelerate at the same rate due to gravity...

<10 minues later>

...we can therefore conclude that my effect goes off, nullifying the target of your spell, so it fizzles.

Me: ...

Magic_Guy: Are you done?

Me: Indeed. I'm off to make a ruling on Stand Firm...

Talk Fantasy Football

Woody's Sticky FAQ inaccuracies

Re: LRB the most official document?

Minor points and Officiality

Re: Minor points and Officiality

Officiality

Woody's addendum