Dude, is it me or are Vampires bad?

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:46 pm

If you're going to have a clear concept of tiering, I think that you could do worse than BB as is. I think deliberate tiering is the only way to introduce unfairly-good players if you're going to neutralize them with anti-powers: otherwise, you end up with "Starkad" mechanics, from the mythic Norse figure who was given blessings by Odin and curses by Thor: he'd win every fight but would always be wounded, he'd never want for money but would never hold any land, etc.

The worst example of this (hard-to-avoid) game design trap is the 1st ed. D&D Barbarian (you know, the one from Unearthed Errata), where the guy gets these superpowered advantages and unplayable disadvantages and ends up wrecking every single campaign one way or another. The Cavalier was that way too, but not as bad.

So, yeah, if you're going to compensate for Superman with built-in Kryptonite, you need to build in deliberate tiers and put him on a lower one, 'cause otherwise it'll get problematic fast. Kudos to y'all for seeing that.

There's gotta be a better way, though: it's fine that some teams play with a weaker hand, but this should be limited to teams whose awfulness makes immediate intuitive sense to the viewer (Halflings), or to skill-based schtick teams (Slann). I think the UW/Chaos Pact teams have a cool enough limitation to justify tiering down, but the Vampire disadvantage feels really forced to me, and it seems that they could be kept at the bottom of Tier 1 (in Tom's terms: that's what I meant by "Tier 2" in my post above) without being at all overpowered just by dropping them to 0-4* and replacing Blood Lust with something more manageable.

After all, they start with no Block and no MA7. Chaos has great big advantages (everyone blitzes @ ST4, universal GSM access, and the clear best deal on a Blocker-As-All-Around-Player [admittedly not on Blocker-As-Blocker] in the game), yet it still feels underpowered, solely because of those same limitations.

I know that's not what the powers that be want to do with the team, but if you're building your house rules and want to vamp up your Vamps without getting bitten, then by all means go for the jugular! This team is balanceable vs. Chaos or Dark Elves with a little overhaul. If you're like me and would get offended if someone suggested that they had to play a nerfed team to give me a fair fight (and I would never drop that indignity on someone else, which is the only reason I don't play Stunty teams), this might suit your aesthetics a lot more.

* Or try my Egomaniac rules. That lets you keep 'em 0-6, no prob', but does require either a 10k price increase or a minor nerf (say Loner or AS/GP access).

ttias · Post by **ttias** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:11 am

This should perhaps be in house rules forum. But we've been toying around with some changes to vampires that I've not seen anybody else do (probably someone has).

We've been thinking about puting a limit on bloodlusting, so that each vampire only can bloodlust once per drive. After that he's full, and can't swallow an other 'bite'. And easily shown with a little token. This would make them a little less unreliable.

Mad Jackal · Post by **Mad Jackal** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:41 pm

ttias wrote:This should perhaps be in house rules forum. But we've been toying around with some changes to vampires that I've not seen anybody else do (probably someone has).

We've been thinking about puting a limit on bloodlusting, so that each vampire only can bloodlust once per drive. After that he's full, and can't swallow an other 'bite'. And easily shown with a little token. This would make them a little less unreliable.

1. Wow that seems really powerfull to me. KNOWING my negetrait player isn't going to fail is GOLD!

2. it seems like a pain in the neck trying to track so that there will be no argument about who had already failed.

3. This creates a totally new mechanic from the current roll every time negetrait system.

sann0638 · Post by **sann0638** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:49 pm

Pain in the neck. Hur hur.

Glowworm · Post by **Glowworm** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:53 pm

I know Im going down the Vanilla rules route but why not replace "Bloodlust" with "Wild animal"? Ok you will still fail the roll as often, but he (The Vamp) doesnt move (or at worse end up off the pitch)he keeps his tackle zone and you dont risk the lose of a Thrall....

In a game where we spend alot of time discussing the rules (check the posts on the rules threads!!) Would it really hurt to drop a "Skill" thats only applicable to one type of player and which can be replaced by an existing rule that seems to accomplish what you want (no uber Vamps here, they will still not be 100% reliable)
I know there are other rules that apply to one player type (Bombadier/ball and chain/Take root ect) but there are no real substitutes for these in other skills

I am building a Vamp based team and intend to ask my Commisioner if I can try wild animal as a substitute for Blood lust as a trial (if hes not read this by then, i expect he will have!!)

Mad Jackal · Post by **Mad Jackal** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 7:07 pm

Wild animal is aweful. it is bad enough when it is your lone Rat Ogre or lone Snow Troll or lone Mino.

But having Wild Animal on 6 vampires

At absolute best I'd think you could play with 2 on the pitch at once.

One blitz action per turn will guarantee that 50% of the time you do nothing with those un-marked vamps. And At least with blood lust you can still move (and gaze) when you fail.

Just standing there dumb struck is asking to be ganged up upon and fouled to death. Then you'll be left playing with out numbered thralls.

No thank you. That's on the opposite end of the previous suggestion.

Joemanji · Post by **Joemanji** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:33 pm

Wild Animal is a joke. It needs immediate fixing IMO. No place for it on more players.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:40 pm

It's way better than the old one.

Glowworm · Post by **Glowworm** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:58 pm

Mad Jackal wrote:Wild animal is aweful. it is bad enough when it is your lone Rat Ogre or lone Snow Troll or lone Mino.

But all the above have loner, vamps dont, however

I accept your point (and joemanji's) but still think it would be better than the current rule...
didnt realise people hated W/A so much!! I just live with it on my Mino, perhaps we should have a "I hate this skill most" vote..

Sidestep or Tackle would get my vote!!

Glowworm · Post by **Glowworm** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:04 pm

didnt realise people hated W/A so much!! I just live with it on my Mino, perhaps we should have a "I hate this skill most" vote..

Sidestep or Tackle would get my vote!!

from what i just read (posted elsewhere by Joemanji)W/A

already has a "fan club" !!

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:28 pm

I'd hate to have WA on a 0-6 player, but unlike previous versions it doesn't totally make Minos/R.O.U.S.es/Snow Trolls unplayable. 0-6 non-Loner Boneheads would be fun, but doesn't seem very Vampy.

I think a better-planned version of OFAB that tailors the odds to the number of available Vamps (progressively decreasing the value:TV ratio for such elite players) and a fun, easy-to-understand nerf like needing doubles for G skills sounds better than any tactical anti-skill.

Mad Jackal · Post by **Mad Jackal** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:30 pm

@ glowworm.

fair enough about Loner. But, using a team re-roll on it- or Pro makes it at best 75%.

The current Blood lust is 83% base, and even if you fail you still get to move for position or defense or what not and gaze.

As it is, blood lust you can elect to leave vamps standing if you need to. But you'll be doing it more with Wild animal instead.

Plus, the biggest part for me is the Plan B with your vamp. He should alwsy have an "if I fail blood lust" task... If you replace that with "if I fail wild animal - (which he's apt to do more often) I stand here and do squat.

The team will get gutted. Period. They'll suck even worse than the complaints now.

in my humble opinion.

Mad Jackal · Post by **Mad Jackal** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:39 pm

Joemanji wrote:Wild Animal is a joke. It needs immediate fixing IMO. No place for it on more players.

I finally retired my Norse and cut my Rat Ogre. The skill is not worth the price of the player in my minds. Its a total joke.

My guess is that the teams that can take a Mino can live with it, but not me or my teams.

Storch · Post by **Storch** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 1:07 am

One thing I have noticed that might mitigate it a bit for some teams (CHaos and Chaos Dwarves) is that the Mino can get claws. When your first skill choice can give you a claw/MB combo on a ST5 player it's easier to force yourself to deal with Wild Animal.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:28 am

If the proposed BL change comes in (limit to BH) I think the team will be exactly where it needs to be.

In an ideal world, I'd make each thrall have a "bitten" level. (Per game) First time bitten they're stunned, 2nd KO, 3rd BH and 4th+ (if you brought them back) straight Cas roll.
But that's to complicated to even get considered nowadays.

Another big, fat NO vote for changing BL to WA.