OFAB problem?

Don't understand a particular rule or just need to clarify something? This is the forum for you. With 2 of the BBRC members and the main LRB5/6 writer present at TFF, you're bound to get as good an answer as possible.

Moderator: TFF Mods

Skummy
Legend
Legend
Posts: 4567
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2002 5:48 pm
Location: Camping on private island, per BBRC advice.

Post by Skummy »

Tim wrote:- does the Thrall have to be standing? Can several vamps feed on one thrall in the same turn (if stunned is rolled for inj). (from the wording i say yes)
The thrall does not have to be standing. Multiple vampires can feed on the same thrall.
Tim wrote:- can a vamp with the ball score on his OFAB move? (moves to the endzone, finishes next to a Thrall -> TD? = Thrall safe?) (from the wording i say yes)
Currently they can. There was some discussion of changing this, though.
Tim wrote:- i guess the vamp has to dodge opponents TZ while he moves to the thrall, right? (from the wording i say yes)
Absolutely. Defensive tactics against vampires could be very interesting. Screening off or taking out thralls becomes even more important when more vampires are on the field.
Tim wrote:- when no thrall is in range, can the vamp move anywhere before being "beamed" of the pitch (td possible?)
Yes, that's currently how it works.
Tim wrote:- if the vamp falls down on his way to the thrall, armour roll first (he goes to KO or injured maybe), then he goes into reserves? (from the KO/Inj box?) Surely not, but could be read that way.
The injury would apply as normal. This is really a common sense thing, and the text for the vampires is already long enough.
Tim wrote:It's surely a rule that has a lot of possible clarification issues coming up.
Couldn't it just be a rule like: 2+, on a one, vamp loses action, does not move. if thrall adjecent, thrall goes down (inj roll). if no thrall adjecent, vamp falls stunned (both no TO if ball was not involved).
That is much simpler, but you've funamentally changed the effect of the negatrait. With those rules, vampires would be more likely to go out on their own and there would be no reason to think twice about fielding 8 of them. The biggest problem with putting together any vampire team is that they are a player with a 4 strength and a 4 agility. Without some serious nerfing negatrait, that's just way too good.

Reason: ''
[url=http://www.bloodbowl.net/naf.php?page=tournamentinfo&uname=skummy]Skummy's Tourney History[/url]
User avatar
GalakStarscraper
Godfather of Blood Bowl
Posts: 15882
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Indiana, USA
Contact:

Post by GalakStarscraper »

Tim wrote:
GalakStarscraper wrote: A player with this characteristic must occasionally feed on the blood of the living. At the start of any action where the player is not stunned, roll a D6. On a 2+ the player may carry out the action as normal. On a '1', however, the player is overcome with a desire for blood. The player's team loses the declared action for that turn and the player must instead make a Move Action. If the player finishes moving standing adjacent to a Thrall from his own team, immediately roll for unmodified injury on that Thrall (an injury to the Thrall is not a turnover unless he was holding the ball). If the player does not finish moving next to a Thrall from his own team, then he runs into Reserves to find a pretty maiden groupie to quench his thirst. Place him in the reserves box, this is a turnover (if he was holding the ball it scatters once from the final square of his movement.) The Vampire's Move action is not consided ended until he injures a Thrall or runs into Reserves.
Some questions on that wording:
Tim, unfortunatley Skummy answered your questions based on the Annual wording and not the wording that will be used when the team becomes official which you quoted above. So let try these answers based on the above text and not the Annual text.
- does the Thrall have to be standing? Can several vamps feed on one thrall in the same turn (if stunned is rolled for inj). (from the wording i say yes)
The Thrall does not have to be standing, and yes several Vampires can feed from the same Thrall if they can reach him (assuming they don't take him out (KO or worse)). Nothing in the description prohibits it.
- can a vamp with the ball score on his OFAB move? (moves to the endzone, finishes next to a Thrall -> TD? = Thrall safe?) (from the wording i say yes)
Actually then you missed the last line of the description. Since the rules say a player is standing in the end zone after his action is a TD, A vampire cannot fail OFAB and get a TD by moving to the end zone. Order of operations ... move to end zone, end movement, fail the OFAB requirement, go to Reserves, action now ends ... players is not standing in the end zone with the ball ... so no TD.
- i guess the vamp has to dodge opponents TZ while he moves to the thrall, right? (from the wording i say yes)
Its a normal move action so yes the player would have to Dodge, could use Hypnotic Gaze, Leap, etc ... its just a normal move action. Thats why the description says its a Move action.
- when no thrall is in range, can the vamp move anywhere before being "beamed" of the pitch (td possible?)
Yes, as the desciption says, its a move action with the ball scattering from the final square when done. However as I noted, since the Move action is not considered finished until after Thrall injury or going to reserves, a failed OFAB player that runs into the End Zone and isn't next to a Thrall when done will not score a TD as he is no longer standing in the End Zone when his action finishes.
- if the vamp falls down on his way to the thrall, armour roll first (he goes to KO or injured maybe), then he goes into reserves? (from the KO/Inj box?) Surely not, but could be read that way.
No, anyone trying to read it that way is trying to hard to bend the rules. The injury would take priority. This is one of those things we just have to trust on the intelligence of the commishes. However failing a Dodge and going prone or stunned will not stop the Vampire from going to reserves.
It's surely a rule that has a lot of possible clarification issues coming up.
Couldn't it just be a rule like: 2+, on a one, vamp loses action, does not move. if thrall adjecent, thrall goes down (inj roll). if no thrall adjecent, vamp falls stunned (both no TO if ball was not involved). Same spririt, less implications ...
Actually no this would allow the team to run right over its opponents (Skummy described why ... more Vampires would mean more ability to ignore this trait). Do not estimate the power of ST 4/AG 4 players. I played Vampires for years and this is a team that steamrolls opponents (not just defeats them). It was nothing for me to win my games 5-0. This version of OFAB is needed if the team is to have any chance of being a balanced addition to the game.

Galak

Reason: ''
Cervidal
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 12:41 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by Cervidal »

I'm not quite sure why the Vampire could only declare a Move action. It would seem to me that a Blitz action would be appropriate, too.

Reason: ''
User avatar
Grumbledook
Boy Band Member
Posts: 10713
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:53 pm
Location: London Town

Post by Grumbledook »

cause he has to move and bite a thrall, too busy to go block someone, he is overcome with bloodlust

Reason: ''
User avatar
GalakStarscraper
Godfather of Blood Bowl
Posts: 15882
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Indiana, USA
Contact:

Post by GalakStarscraper »

Cervidal wrote:I'm not quite sure why the Vampire could only declare a Move action. It would seem to me that a Blitz action would be appropriate, too.
Bud if you want to kill your own great idea ... continue to make suggestions like that right before the BBRC meets.

Galak

Reason: ''
Cervidal
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 12:41 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by Cervidal »

Suggestion, nothin'. I'm not sure such a change would make it overpowered. Why wouldn't a Vampire barrel over someone to get to a fresh neck?

I'm also not sure how such a minute suggestion jeapordizes an entire rule.

Reason: ''
User avatar
GalakStarscraper
Godfather of Blood Bowl
Posts: 15882
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Indiana, USA
Contact:

Post by GalakStarscraper »

Cervidal wrote:I'm also not sure how such a minute suggestion jeapordizes an entire rule.
Okay let's try this:

1) The new OFAB becoming official is probably going to be 4-3 BBRC vote if I had to guess at this point.
2) Any new proposals at this point won't have enough time to be tested hardly at all so will muddy the waters and give golden opportunity for that vote to be only 3 for instead of 3 against.
3) The Move only version has been tested over many games by many different coaches and not a single one has requested a Blitz OR Move action for failure in any of the discussions that I've had.
4) The new OFAB should rob the actions (like Blitzes) (just like Bonehead does). If you allow the blitz to still happen, you make the new OFAB less of a negative. We could debate for years how much less, but the fact is that you'd have to agree its less to some degree. And from the playtesters, no one asked for less of a negative.

I've had discussions at length with all the BBRC members except Dean about getting new OFAB into the game. Its not universally loved. At this point if the waters get muddy, the whole thing could be voted down and forgotten.

Bud ... maybe it should be Move or Blitz action, but with October already here in terms of playtest data, you capture the fort in front of you and move to capture the next one later. If the trait really needs to be both, thats a change for next year. We are out of time and on a tight rope to get the new OFAB in. I love your new rule and all I'm asking is for you to think about this politically for a second. Ya its your baby, hands down, no argument. But a lot of folks have been involved to the tune of hours of discussion and testing ... let's give that tested and well liked rule a chance to actually make it into the rulebook in the first place before trying to change it.

Galak

Reason: ''
Cervidal
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 12:41 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by Cervidal »

(*short, personal, angry rant*)

To be honest with you, after seeing an article with the rule I came up with give me no credit, I'm in no mood to be polite about debate regarding this skill. It's always a hoot to see folks' skeptical looks when I'm thumbing through the mag at my local haunt and mention that I came up with the idea.

(*end short, personal, angry rant*)

It was simply a thought, anyways. I hold no sway over folks' votes. I'm suprised that it's even a 4-3 majority in favor of. I figured the rule would stay experimental for another year.

Reason: ''
User avatar
GalakStarscraper
Godfather of Blood Bowl
Posts: 15882
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Indiana, USA
Contact:

Post by GalakStarscraper »

Bud ... okay that I understand.

By the time it got presented to Andy by several sources, the links back to you were probably lost. Doesn't change the fact that I still think of it as COFAB ... even if the credit was not given.

I'm sorry that no credit was listed in the Annual. But you had a bit of brilliant inspiration and all I can say is thank you. The Vampires have always been my 2nd favorite Blood Bowl team ... but they were horribly broken. Thank you for fixing one of my all time favorite teams.

If the team becomes official .... I'm make sure the pages of Blood-bowl.net give credit where it is due for the team page.

Galak

Reason: ''
Cervidal
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 12:41 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by Cervidal »

Ah, Galak, you git. You went and inflated my ego. (*smirk*)

I DO apprieciate that the rule has been as extensively playtested as it has been. I'll be starting up a Vampire team, myself, very shortly using the rules as y'all've revised 'em.

Reason: ''
User avatar
Grumbledook
Boy Band Member
Posts: 10713
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:53 pm
Location: London Town

Post by Grumbledook »

correct me if i am wrong or simply forgotton but can the vampire use their hypnotic gaze if they fail ofab cause they have to make a move action and i don't remember the rule saying they can't so sense dictates they can

i would rather that they didn't but that would mean bloating the rule some more so whatever

Reason: ''
User avatar
GalakStarscraper
Godfather of Blood Bowl
Posts: 15882
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Indiana, USA
Contact:

Post by GalakStarscraper »

Grumbledook wrote:i would rather that they didn't but that would mean bloating the rule some more so whatever
they can use HGaze ... the rules bloat isn't worth the removal of the ability.

Galak

Reason: ''
User avatar
Grumbledook
Boy Band Member
Posts: 10713
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:53 pm
Location: London Town

Post by Grumbledook »

yer fair enough, thats how it works in javabowl at the moment anyway ;]

Reason: ''
Sceadeau
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 8:15 am

Post by Sceadeau »

GalakStarscraper wrote:Bud ... okay that I understand.

By the time it got presented to Andy by several sources, the links back to you were probably lost. Doesn't change the fact that I still think of it as COFAB ... even if the credit was not given.

I'm sorry that no credit was listed in the Annual. But you had a bit of brilliant inspiration and all I can say is thank you. The Vampires have always been my 2nd favorite Blood Bowl team ... but they were horribly broken. Thank you for fixing one of my all time favorite teams.

If the team becomes official .... I'm make sure the pages of Blood-bowl.net give credit where it is due for the team page.

Galak
AHA! I've been wondering why in the world everyone on this site had been calling it COFAB. I couldn't for the life of me figure out what C would mean. Now I know :) Cervidal :)

I've been playtesting this as well, and I personally find the vamps to be as underpowered as you'd hope for str 4/ag 4 blodgers. Typically players like that would ruin a game, especially with HypnoGaze. However, this new OFAB slightly stunts team developement (eating your own men tends to do this) and makes you be extra careful before each movement declared with them. I think the rule is perfect as it is and hope it does get included into officialdom.

Reason: ''
Post Reply