Safe Throw and Interceptions: dice order

[AK_Dave]

If I can easily move so as to avoid interception chances, I'll do so. But if doing so means several die-rolls, even at 2+, then I'll rethink that. Sometimes I'll just throw the ball anyways and take my chances with Nuffle. Especially in an open league when I'm already up on TDs.

[Smeborg]

Thanks, Galak, for taking time to understand the posts and to describe the issue. I appreciate that.

I will just make one last post on the topic.

Rules in a game, like laws in real life, do not always have the intended effect. For me and many of my opponents, the order of dice rolling in the Pass/Intercept rules module acts a a discouragement to pass over the head of an opponent. So in practice, there is less passing (and less interception) in our games than would be the case under my (theoretical) proposed rule.

Likewise, the Pass Block skill does not in practice (in games I have played) increase the number of interceptions. Rather, it discourages passing and thereby decreases the number of interception chances.

I see Pass Block as a largely indirect skill, which is rarely used, but has value by encouraging my opponent to play in a certain way. Strip Ball and Disturbing Presence are similarly indirect skills. Strip Ball encourages my opponent to keep the ball in the hands of a player with Sure Hands, Disturbing Presence encourages my opponent to keep the ball in hand (no hand-offs or passes), while Pass Block discourages my opponent from passing.

So actually, I'm arguing, among other things, that my proposed (theoretical) rule change would increase, rather than decrease, the amount of passing and intercepting in the game, as well as increasing the use of the Pass Block skill (in practice).

Hope this helps.

[Arngrim]

The rule is counterintuitive, but I agree that as soon as you get used to it, the mechanics makes sense.

I have a bigger problem with wrapping my head around declaring a pass before I have the ball...

[s031720]

Why would you do that?

[Darkson]

Because it's the rules?

[Xeterog]

The point still stands that the ball is intercepted before leaving the hand under the current rules, which is...for wont of a better word...silly.

Only if you look at it as a sequential set of events. However, it is not sequential (nor is it meant to be). Look at passing the ball as an event that you need to find the result of. There are several end results of a pass...it could be intercepted, it could be accurate, it could be inaccurate, it could be fumbled. (the catching of the pass is a separate event, btw)

The die rolls (and their order) not a step by step sequential representation of getting to the Result of the pass, but a way to efficiently determine what happened when you passed the ball. So, you check for interceptions first...if the ball was intercepted it obvioulsy was not fumbled and the path of the ball went over the intercepter's square. This has a couple of very good effects:
1) Interception rates are increased
1a) Passing teams must take risks to avoid throwing over potential intercepters to elliminate this.
1b) Pass blockers are more valuable--either as potential interceptors or as further complications to the passings teams ability to get a clear pass in
2) The passing team doesn't waste any Team RR's on an intercepted passes

So, in short, the passing rules don't make sense only if you insist on all your rolls being in a sequential order...once you can realize that you are looking for a result, the order of the dice rolls makes more sense.

(I like to think of it as a black box...I put in that I'm passing and the black box figures out the result of that pass...it doesn't really matter what order the cacluations are to me, just the end result).

[AK_Dave]

I have a bigger problem with wrapping my head around declaring a pass before I have the ball...

Yes, technically you declare a Pass action at the start of the player's move (the intended Thrower's move). He then moves, picks up the ball, finishes his move, and throws.

Often, as I've seen it, the Pass action isn't "declared" until it is time to throw the ball. Or the coach starts out thinking "pass" and ends up with "hand off".

9/10 times the moment when the declaration is made is 100% irrelevant. Why? Because if you muff the action and cause a turnover (double-1 the pick-up) then it doesn't matter what you declared. The action is lost.

The only scenario where it MIGHT matter is when the coach starts out thinking "pass" and ends the move with a hand-off to another player who actually does the pass. Technically, the pass action was burned and the hand-off couldn't take place. I don't play with anyone that nit-picky, though if I did they would technically be right.

In my club, often we're halfway through a player's move before someone announces "this is my blitz", or "throwing the ball", or "hand-off". All of which is, admittedly, illegal play.

As 5ed nerfed the "illegal procedure" call, the only responses to the above that I see are: 1) no you don't, and 2) keep my mouth shut. Since it is a friendly club, I keep my mouth shut.

[Grumbledook]

i don't mind people saying the action after moving a couple od squares as long as they havn't rolled any dice yet

if they did a dodge or something and then decide oh this is my blitz pass handoff whatever, depending on how new to the game they are, most of the time I won't let them do it

I wouldn't ask my opponent to let me if I'd not announced it myself, so if I am lenient it comes with a one time only warning, that next time they won't be allowed to do it

[AK_Dave]

So actually, I'm arguing, among other things, that my proposed (theoretical) rule change would increase, rather than decrease, the amount of passing and intercepting in the game, as well as increasing the use of the Pass Block skill (in practice).

While it is true that Passing is largely frowned upon by conservative risk-averse players, I don't think that I can necessarily draw the conclusion that changing the order of die-rolling will encourage these same conservative risk-averse players to begin throwing the ball.

As it stands now, it is uncommon to see a throw go over the head of opposing players unless that is the only way to throw the ball and throwing the ball is less risky than not throwing the ball. The risk of interception does lead even pass-prone players to hold the ball when they'd like to pass it. I don't see your change as an improvement. As it stands now, if I throw and it is intercepted I haven't burned a Team Reroll. With your change, an Interception is in my eye "likely" to occur after I've already burned a reroll to avoid a fumble or inaccurate pass.

Pass Block does discourage passing. It has the tendancy of funnelling passes into a corridor that the PB player cannot cover. This fact doesn't change with your proposed change. I am always quick to remind my opponent of my PB potential range when my opponent is bandying about with the rangeruler and angling for a throw.

I agree that your proposed change, putting the die rolls in "realistic" order, would produce a logical sequence of events. I don't agree that it would simply anything. It would make minor changes to the probability of a few events but the probability of each event in sequence would remain the same. Net result: change for the sake of change.

If we're going to nitpick everyone's insignificant pet peeves for the sake of making change, lets start with mine (see elsethread).

[Arngrim]

OT
Dave and Grumble;
Yep, we play that way too, but I wouldn't mind if the rulebook said that the pass action does not have to be declared until your own tem is in possession of the ball.

Just because I really try to adhere to the rules myself, and if I forget, and someone calls me on it, they'd be right and that would suck for a little while
back on topic.

[Grumbledook]

changing pass action to be announced when you hold the ball, does that mean the player has to start off the turn with the ball, or you can change action after you gain hold of it (or just change a move action?)?

creates more rules for an already packed rulebook and an inconsistency

its also part of being a coach to know who you want to pass with (including making the pickup and dodges gfi etc to get there)

for example if you had one player who had to make 2 dodges but would have an easier throw (who had the dodge skill) but used his dodge skill on the first dodge, you may decide to then try the harder pass with a player who doesn't need to do a dodge

its the same reason you declare a blitz action before you are next to an opponent to hit ;o

[Jural]

For me, the only "problem" with the intercept rule is that it is un-intuitive, and is very likely to be done wrong when played by new players. Unlike other difficult parts of the game (calculating blocking assists, etc.) there is a real world justification for having the order being opposite of the actual order in the game.

Now this is generally not a problem, as one can correct the coach, but I have seen it used improperly a few times.

For example, I have seen a rookie coach pass up his chance to intercept in the correct time frame and try to roll it after the passing die has been rolled, only to be told he has lost his chance. This tends to frustrate players to no end, especially as the intercept rules are unintuitive and uncommon, so one might be a "rookie" to them even with 20+ games under the belt.

That being said, I wouldn't recommend changing anything. The game works well as is.

[GalakStarscraper]

The LRB 5.0 has this as a bolded note that its in a wierd order to try to put a spotlight on it for players.

There is a point in time that a player really should read the rulebook.

Galak

[s031720]

Darkson:

Yeah, yeah, details details. I forgot about picking up the ball.

Grumble:
Thats how we play in our tabletop league, and thats how I play in Pbem aswell, and noone has ever complained. Friendly is better than anal interpretation of rules.

As for the overall issue of this thread, for me function comes first. As long as it works, its fine with me. And the current system works, so that is all fine by me. Maybe it could be done diffrently, but if that means extra complications, more dicerolls, paradoxal situations that must be ruled out in some FAQ somewhere, its not worth it. Even if it would be as functional as it is right now, why change?

[Warpstone]

Grumble:
Thats how we play in our tabletop league, and thats how I play in Pbem aswell, and noone has ever complained. Friendly is better than anal interpretation of rules.

I'm not really sure how that constitutes an anal interpretation of the rules? In our tabletop league, most of us smack our head when we forget to declare our action before rolling dice. We then proceed to pay a high price for it as our opponent will exploit the letoff, but it's basically understood as a player error. Your opponent may allow you to go ahead with the action if it's obvious that's what you intended, but it's still sloppy play and you should eliminate the bad habit. I would not tolerate it as more than a once in a blue moon exception--if it happens regularly, then that's basically cheating.

BTW, in PbEM it's usually much more strictly enforced because your opponent really has no clue as to what you intend to do with the play.