Removing Bloodlust

Pil · Post by **Pil** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:29 am

Since Vampire teams are bad, and we all know they are bad, I was wondering if anyone has ever tried just to take the bloodlust rule away from them. Not replace it with another negative skill, but just ditch it altogether. I can really imagine the vampires getting much too powerful then, but has anyone ever really tried it?

Little_Rat · Post by **Little_Rat** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:29 am

Vampires without Bloodlust? that´s cruel. But our league has the chance of removing bloodlust when you throw a double ^^

TuernRedvenom · Post by **TuernRedvenom** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:35 am

Pil wrote:Since Vampire teams are bad, and we all know they are bad, I was wondering if anyone has ever tried just to take the bloodlust rule away from them. Not replace it with another negative skill, but just ditch it altogether. I can really imagine the vampires getting much too powerful then, but has anyone ever really tried it?

That would just be...wrong...

Maybe if you added 60k (probably more) to their cost or something then, maybe...

Vampires have an awesome statline and awesome skill access, the reason they have bloodlust is because otherwise they would run rampant!

Snew · Post by **Snew** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:37 pm

I played in an online league without negatraits. Vampires without bloodlust are WAY over the top. There's really no stopping them.

Pil · Post by **Pil** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:10 pm

Well, thanks for letting me know, I could imagine they were good but I really wondered how good they would be

After some thinking I decided that dropping Bloodlust would indeed make them very scary. I have proposed the option of dropping Bloodlust on a double roll (adding 30k in team value like a double skill), it seems a good option to give our local vampire team a sporting chance. A vampire like this without bloodlust is still very good, but at least there will not be a lot of them.

Lychanthrope · Post by **Lychanthrope** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:55 pm

I play a high school kid at GenCon who had Vamps. He was never bothered by bloodlust. Every time it came up he had a thrall near where he wanted to go anyways and went there did whatever and bit the thrall. Not once did bloodlust make him do some thing he hadn't planned on doing anyways. It also helped that the dice LOVED him for this game. He made 2 or 3 5+ moves. It was awesome to watch. Stomped me good.

Duke Jan · Post by **Duke Jan** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 6:13 pm

If rolling double can help you get rid of a negatrait it should be double six instead of +ST and with the associated TV increase.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 7:32 pm

You could make them 0-2 and bump the price up by 30k. Then you've only got to put them in a really uninspiring team, and you're nice and average. A good coach can account for two supermen if he's able to win out everywhere else, but more than that can be a big problem.

I hate Bloodlust. Hate hate hate. I'm fixing it with alternative negatraits, though. I'm not touching the idea of Vamps without a big fat F-U accompanying them.

You could take off G access, and make them AS/GP. Getting Vampires to play football isn't hard, but getting them to practice is like herding cats. No, pardon me: like herding tigers.

This might not be enough. In my house rules, I'm giving them Loner and "Egomaniac" as negatraits (I know that's not what you want to do). Vampires are very self-absorbed and dislike anyone and everyone else, so they don't always follow the game plan or play to win; hence Loner. Egomaniac reads: at the beginning of each drive, when the Egomaniac is set out on the field, roll a d6. If the result is a 6, or is greater than the number of players on your team (including the Egomaniac) on the field so far, you may set him up (feel free to move him around until your position is set). If you roll less than or equal to the number of players already on the field, the Egomaniac doesn't feel like playing or is mad that he didn't get top billing, and won't play this drive; leave him in the Reserves. This way, if you have four, you'll on average field a little more than two, with the others functioning as just a casualty cushion.

Jural · Post by **Jural** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 11:12 pm

How about instead of removing Bloodlust, it's changed so that the Vampire tries to bite a player on the opposite team. Treat the bite as if it were an attack with a chainsaw, with no chance of kickback.

Then I'm SURE they'll be overpowered, and won't have to think too hard this afternoon.

Actually, there is one minor vampire tweak I have considered, but it seems so obvious that somebody must have tried it before.

If Bloodlust kills a Thrall, then the Thrall is added to the team as a Vampire (after the match.)

I don't think it would help the team that much, but it would help them develop and replace vamps quicker.

Pil · Post by **Pil** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 11:24 am

We have considered being allowed to bite opponents, which would make sense from a fluff point of view, but ruleswise it's not really an option. At the moment we have agreed that a vampire may remove bloodlust on a double (any double), but will increase in value with 60k. This gives our vampire coach a bit more hope in the long run. For really long lasting leagues it would probably still be too good, but I don't think our league will last that long and we will only see two vampires tops without bloodlust (though likely it will take a while for the first to even appear).

I have to agree though that if planned ahead (sending thralls where you want your vamps to go) would be the best way of playing vampires, as bloodlust will not mess up your move actions. Unfortunately our vampire coach tends to forget to do this.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 6:38 pm

Pil wrote:We have considered being allowed to bite opponents, which would make sense from a fluff point of view, but ruleswise it's not really an option.

If you want to go that route ... just do what the PBBL rules did originally before it was changed.

Raise the price of the Vampires by 10k and give them the Stab skill.

This respresents the fangs pretty darn well and isn't a lot of extra rules and it was removed from PBBL because it wasn't felt by some coaches to be worth the 10k per a Vamp (ie its not horribily overbalancing to the team for them to have it).

Galak

sangraal · Post by **sangraal** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:21 am

I've not tested it, but I've always felt changing the bloodlust roll to a d8 instead of a d6 might be the way to go -- no need to change anything else.

sangraal

stormmaster1 · Post by **stormmaster1** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:56 am

what about making bloodlust similar to bonehead if you're desperate for a change?

fen · Post by **fen** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:35 pm

GalakStarscraper wrote:This respresents the fangs pretty darn well and isn't a lot of extra rules and it was removed from PBBL because it wasn't felt by some coaches to be worth the 10k per a Vamp (ie its not horribily overbalancing to the team for them to have it).

Darn, I wish it had been kept in.

Joemanji · Post by **Joemanji** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:13 pm

fen wrote:Darn, I wish it had been kept in.

Fluff-ful yes, but useful no IMO. Too risky to activate a Vamp just for that.

sangraal wrote:I've not tested it, but I've always felt changing the bloodlust roll to a d8 instead of a d6 might be the way to go -- no need to change anything else.

Interesting. But I have seen Vamps coached very effectively indeed with the current rules. I like to see it tested, but my feeling is that this would raise the team to the same level as the basic teams. Which might not be a bad thing, especially if the Stunty/Tackle change goes ahead.

Talk Fantasy Football

Removing Bloodlust

Removing Bloodlust

Re: Removing Bloodlust