After failing to argue an IP call, can I then use a reroll?

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Wed Feb 12, 2003 2:03 pm

Rulewise i see it this way:

1. IP is called
2. Player announces he is arguing the call
3. Argue the call is unsuccessful - the original call stands
4. NOW the IP stands and a re-roll can be burnt to avoid it

That's how I see the rules, but i'm inclined to agree that it's incredibly cheesy as it means you can always argue before burning the re-roll, so it'd prefer to see it played as has been suggested above that you either lose a re-roll or argue.

Skummy · Post by **Skummy** » Wed Feb 12, 2003 2:28 pm

p. 15, LRB "A coach my use a team re-roll to re-roll a dice roll for an action carried out by a player in their own team druing their own team turn."

So wizards, apothecaries and head coaches (excepting the master vampire) can't be rerolled.

ZanzerTem · Post by **ZanzerTem** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 7:30 pm

I agree with Monkey. In our league, that is how it is done. Our commish sees it as this:

"If the ref actually enforces the IP call (you fail the argument), then you can penalize yourself by either losing a reroll, or ending your turn. If you lose a reroll, then you may continue your turn."

You guys are reading too much into it. You aren't rerolling anything. You are being penalized for not moving your turn marker. The "if you argue it and burn a reroll, you have to reroll the arguement" thing doesn't apply in this situation, because although you are making decisions, it isn't your turn yet. It will only be your turn if you successfully argue the call or burn a reroll.

Artificial Penguin · Post by **Artificial Penguin** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:16 pm

Thanks everyone, I think Bloodbasher got what I was really asking. I'm a bit disappointed that this is another one of those situations not explicitly covered by the rules, but hey, life's like that sometimes.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:21 pm

Galak, another one for you list of clarifications?

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:24 pm

OK, how about playing it this way.

If you're called for an IP you must first say wheter you're going to burn a RR or not. The argue the call. If you suceed then you get your rr back/continue your turn. If you fail your original decision stands. If you decide to burn a RR and suceed in arguing the call, it still counts as your RR use that turn.

ZanzerTem · Post by **ZanzerTem** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:04 pm

Darkson wrote:If you decide to burn a RR and suceed in arguing the call, it still counts as your RR use that turn.

If you succeed in argueing the call, there is no need to lose a reroll.

If you fail in argueing the call, then you can lose a reroll and tell the ref to feck off.

If you don't argue it, and lose a reroll, you continue with your turn as normal. Question is, does this count as your reroll for the turn? I'm thinking yes.

Another example of "even if you play BloodBowl exactly by the rules, you are still playing with your own house rules."

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:20 pm

What I meant was you get your RR back, but it counts as used for this turn ie no re-rolling blocks.

Think of it as gambling your RR.

ZanzerTem · Post by **ZanzerTem** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:25 pm

Ah, that would make it interesting then.

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 11:32 pm

I think that would be useful as a house rule, otherwise there is no reason not, to argue the call before losing the re-roll.

As for whether burning a re-roll counts as using it for the turn, LRB p8:

If the coach uses up a re-roll, he is not allowed to use another re-roll counter in the same turn.

Artificial Penguin · Post by **Artificial Penguin** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 11:35 pm

Ahhh, nice idea Darkson, I like that. That really does balance it out, IMO.

Vitalis · Post by **Vitalis** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 3:51 am

Actually Darkson:

I hate this idea of yours.

The way I've played it and will continue to play it - hopefully:
IP is called
You choose or not to argue
If no argument or unsuccessfull argument you choose whether or not to burn the RR for your turn.

This has IMHO clear foundation in both 3rd ed, 4th ed and the current LRB.

Why cloud this simple procedure with beardy house rules?

Artificial Penguin · Post by **Artificial Penguin** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 6:50 pm

The problem I see, Vitalis, is that arguing the call for most teams is a no-brainer. There's really no reason not to, as long as your head coach isn't needed to do some special task for your team. Adding in a house rule is necessary to make it require a little thought.

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 7:30 pm

i disagree penguin...not everything has to have a downside.

the main downside of arguing the call is that it usually doesn't work. that's good enough.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Fri Feb 14, 2003 9:20 pm

Vitalis wrote:Why cloud this simple procedure with beardy house rules?

In what way is it beardy?

Maybe you have a different defination to what I use, but the rules not beardy IMO.

The only teams I wouldn't argue the call with are teams were I have to have a Head Coach to perform some special action, or a team were the HC is also a player (ie Vamps), otherwise I'll always argue the call (especially as I've been shown I could argue an IP, which I had missed before

)

The fact that this rule will affect all teams equally (well, will effect my teams more

) rules out beardiness as I believed it's definition to be.