A new Big Guy/Negatrait approach

Jugular · Post by **Jugular** » Wed Dec 24, 2003 8:29 pm

ok I have been thinking about this idea for a little bit (i.e. waiting for a bus etc.) . I was heading for an over negative trait as it tends to work better in game balance to start from that side. If the tackle zone was still there and maybe tentacles ignores friendly players i think it could be a good trait idea

Anyones thoughts. Sorry i didn't realise it was an old topic.

Circular_Logic · Post by **Circular_Logic** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:48 am

OK... last night it hit me, how to do a good take-root-mechanic without diceroll:
Whenever the treeman takes a blockaction in 2 subsequent turns, he take root. His MA is reduced to 0 and he may not follow up.#

PS: sorry to unearth the thread

Phreedh · Post by **Phreedh** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:29 pm

I liked Nazgit's suggestions alot... that's the way it should work.

It's easy and fast played. There's a fluidity to it which fits BB perfectly. One generic roll, different effects when failed. Good stuff!

And yeah, I blame Circular for reviving the thread. ;D Don't like that suggestion much, Circ... Having to remember stuff like that over turns isn't really good. It creates alot of extra fuzz.

/Phreedh

narkotic · Post by **narkotic** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:03 pm

May I remark that I still like my original idea, as well.

To place a popular quote here: "I posted this on TBB but was shouted down"

Phreedh · Post by **Phreedh** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:40 pm

narkotic wrote:May I remark that I still like my original idea, as well.

To place a popular quote here: "I posted this on TBB but was shouted down"

May I remark that I didn't like it...

It took away too much flavour of the different negatraits. Well, to be honest it took away the different negatraits...

Why keep RS on the troll if WA and TR are removed? Why not just bunch it all up into one negatrait? I'm not advocating it, I'm just asking why...

Btw, I just thought of something kinda revolutionary. How about having just one Big Guy? Plain and simple "Big Guy", stats wise inbetween troll and ogre. Then just use different models to depict the big guy of choice, depending on what team we coach.

Then we could just have like a standard "stunty fella" too... and use whatever minis we find apropriate, be it halflings, goblins or pantygnomes.

For basic players we could have just "Player"... how's that?

Finally, we can rename it all to "To..." no wait. I'll stop here. ;D

But my suggestion about a generic "Big guy" is actually semi serious. It detracts alot from the diversity and fun of the game though, which is the major appeal to me. I'm just throwing it out to see what others think.

Edit: Btw, I'm not trying to be a cheeky bastard here Narkotic.

upon reviewing my post it had a certain smart-ass air to it which isn't intentional or atleast not directed against you.

/Phreedh

Circular_Logic · Post by **Circular_Logic** » Sat Jul 17, 2004 11:24 am

I guess everyone wants the BG-rolls...

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Tue Jul 27, 2004 1:37 am

From what I see happening in the Vault to BGs, they are starting to look the same, really going to lose too much flavour of the game if the change goes through (and BGs are there mainly for flavour, or they were supposed to be). Giving BGs all one trait (unreliable) and losing Gen access as well as Mighty Blow skill, there seems to be alot of nerfing, too much simplification isn't good for the game IMO. The new suggestion for BGs look so bland I would rather have the negtraits back just for the fluffieness and flavour. If they lose the Gen access and MB to start (but they are large monsters, so they should have something to relfect that, I would suggest starting with the other MB - Multi block, which isn't that bad as going against regular ST3 guys you would need an assist just to get a one die block), I think that should be enough nerfing of power. If you want to make them a real choice to take, then the replacing of positional players to take a BG would make for interesting decisions in team building. I wouldn't do it on a one for one basis, I think that a BG would count toward 2 slots of the max for blocker position (or blitzer position if no blockers on team). This doesn't mean that BGs count as 2 on the roster or on the field, they just reduce the max of blocker/blitzer position on the team, ie take a troll on an orc team and only able to have 2 BOBs max and more linemen to fill the roster, or don't take the troll and be able to field the max amount of positional players which would reduce the amount of linemen on the roster. Migtht make for interesting stategic decisions when making rosters, but that's just something I'm throwing out there, not that anyone will care or pay attention.

Snew · Post by **Snew** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 4:18 pm

I don't like Big Guys. I love the idea of them but I don't like the execution. They should be scrapped altogether for everyone except the stunties. It's in my sig. I'm sure you're all tired of seeing it.

Negatraits are a REALLY STUPID idea and the thought that the're there to add fluffiness is ridiculous. They were implemented to tone down these ridiculous players. The Big Guy himself is the fluffiness.

That said, if we absolutely must have BGs, Narkotic's suggestion is a pretty good one. I'd question some of it though. Why have 2 if the Troll is the only one with RS? Just give them all the Big Guy trait and roll the Bonehead roll into that. Make it all 3+ but, maybe, give offensive assists to that roll (they can be added but defensive players can't negate them). That way, on the LOS, where they're supposed to be most effective, they have a very good chance of doing what they're supposed to be doing, but they may be a risk after everyone gets spread out. 1s will always fail.

Who knows though. Maybe the vault's suggestion is best, especially if they were to make them take up 50% of the Blitzer/Blocker-type positionals like Torg suggested. Only one Wardancers if you want a Treeman, 3 Chaos Dwarves if you want a Troll... that type of thing.

Jimmy_pop · Post by **Jimmy_pop** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 12:50 am

I like that ide that Nazgit hase on BG's.. we shouold really teast it ingame to see if it works!

/Jimmy

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 12:54 am

I like that ide that Nazgit hase on BG's.. we shouold really teast it ingame to see if it works!

Just wanted to save it, in case Jimmy wants to edit it once he is sober.

Jimmy_pop · Post by **Jimmy_pop** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 12:57 am