Solutions

In This Section: Review | The MP | Home | Mail

 
4th Edition BB
Review
Solutions
The MP
 
Toys
The Grab Bag
The Game Sheet
 
New Stuff
Vampire Counts
 

Back to
my homepage

 
After what I'd like to consider very open-minded playtesting, this is what I would do, and why I would do it:

OSPA
OSPA's main goal is the limitation of skill combos. However, it collapses under its own weight when you factor in Traits, the active-player angle, etc. In short, it's too much ruleage with a confusing impact.

That isn't to say there aren't ways to incorporate some of these elements to help prevent the "automatic players" I talked about earlier. The best way to do this, short of skill revisions similar to Mighty Blow, involves keeping the Skill/Trait split, and ditching everything else.

Now I hear you saying, "Huh? I thought every complaint about OSPA started with the Skills/Trait split, and how complicated it was, and how it should be removed."

I disagree. The concept behind the "Trait" - something you can't really 'learn' very easily in the same way you can learn a skill like Block - is just fine. Requiring doubles and access to that skill category? That's also fine.

So you might wonder, "What would this do?" Well, it would limit the number of essential combos, because they simply wouldn't appear often. Don't like the fact that you can use Pass, Accurate, and Strong Arm to get a Long Bomb on a roll of 4+ for an AG3 player, with a re-roll to back it up? Make it very difficult to get Strong Arm. You can use the other stuff, but your player will have to branch outward in another direction. The old Guard, Stand Firm combination? Just more difficult to get. Block, Dauntless, Horns? Requires two doubles rolls (assuming you're not a Beastman).

This would also restore the usefulness to Leap, Jump Up, and Horns, while limiting the powerful skills (Frenzy, Dauntless, Leader, Pro), as you would need a doubles roll to get them.

As further changes, Leap would become one use per turn, as would Sure Feet. This would still give a coach a lot of options, but would prevent him from attaining "automatic combos" without a lot of luck.

The mechanics would be simple to explain, too. Recreate the skill chart on the back of the Red Card, and put all Traits in BOLD. Physical Abilities would also be in BOLD. A simple note would explain the significance:

Some skills are just harder to 'learn' in the traditional sense. These are called Traits, and are listed in BOLD. To gain a Trait, a player must roll doubles on a Star Player Roll, and must have access to the skill category to which the Trait belongs before he can choose it.

Problems tracking skills and traits used this turn? Gone. Problems justifying some combos while removing others? Gone. Limitations on players? Still there, although clearly neither as draconian nor as confusing as OSPA.

New Skill Descriptions
I wouldn't change much here, aside from forcing the use of Hypnotic Gaze to come during the player's action (or immediately preceding or following a block). I think most of these are just peachy.

A few other skills could use tweaking, however. I will post a few comments soon regarding Titchy, Stunty, Mighty Blow, and Throw Team-Mate.

IGMEOY
The first change I would make involves separating the ref roll from the AV roll, and using it as a separate die. This doesn't change the odds, but it does allow more customization of the results of the IGMEOY counter.

Most of us are familiar with a system in which the ref roll 'slides' towards one team, gradually pushing the caught result from 6 to 5 to 4 to 3 to 2. However,I don't really like this system, because it introduces another scale into the game. Furthermore, it doesn't really cause any risk until you get two fouls ahead of your opponent, or some such.

Here's our problem, in a nutshell: a player with the IGMEOY counter tends to hold it until the end of the half, effectively preventing his opponent from fouling.

Here's our solution: if the ref has his eye on you, you are caught on a roll of 4 or more on the ref roll if you commit a foul.

Let's face it - Blood Bowl refs are notoriously poor. They frequently ignore most shenanigans, lest they suffer the wrath of the players, the fans, the Darkside Cowgirls, etc. Even if they do manage to turn their attention to one team, they can't be expected to develop an eagle eye!

I figure 4+ represents the point at which I feel the odds are "fair". I would not let the IGMEOY counter sway me if the foul was important, and probably wouldn't bother with the foul otherwise. That's about the right mix, in my opinion. Jervis himself introduced the rule as "draconian" and "knee-jerk" (or very close to that, sorry), and I think this represents an adequate fine-tuning that stays in line with both game history and game balance. The current 2+ rule is a bit too restrictive on one coach. This would remove that restriction, while still discouraging coaches from throwing extraneous boots. Fouls would truly become strategic.

Wasn't that the aim all along?

Appearance Fees
On BBOWL-L, I suggested that Appearance Fees be determined not just by player SPPs and AF system, but by the difference in team rating. Let's face it, Griff Oberwald isn't going to take the field against the Lowdown Rats. If the Gouged Eye come to town, well, that's another story entirely!

However, the more I thought about this, the more I figured the only real prima donnas who should demand such fees are the Star Players, and they should probably do so on ONE scale, rather than three.

I thus suggest the following:

TR
Difference
  Appearance
Fee
21-50   5,000
51-100   10,000
101+   20,000

Homegrown stars would also be affected. To qualify, a homegrown 'star' would have to have three skills (the definition of "Star Player," according to the Red Card from Death Zone). This would remove SPP consideration from the equation, and would equalize the Appearance Fees for regular players (26+ SPPs) and Big Guys (51+ SPPs), based on the number of skills rather than the number of SPPs.

Appearance Fees would be OFF for the playoffs, as every player aims for the glory of winning the ultimate prize and being declared champions for this season! This will prevent the Treasury from helping determine the league winner. After all, the playoffs are the only time you don't get penalized for having a high TR (remember, the higher-rated team wins any and all tiebreakers when determining playoff seedings).

Special Plays
I just printed the latest revision, and am looking forward to re-reading it soon. I would like to see the duplicate entries removed, and perhaps the Grab Bag cards modified and added. That's about it for that subject. Again, I liked the revisions to the timing issues. A deck would be nice, but I'll simply make my own.

Secret Weapons
Aside from the strange Deathroller and Fanatic exceptions, these are just fine. Apparently, Weapon players can gain SPPs? This isn't very explicit. It would seem possible to score a TD with a player armed with a Poisoned Dagger, and two of those would give him a skill. The Deathroller and Fanatic specifically state they can't gain SPPs, but what about the rest of the Weapons? An interesting question, though not a pressing one.

Allies
(Milo's Great Suggestion [tm] is coming soon to this space. Essentially, it combines the "no linemen" idea with the more open style of the current ally rules, while simultaneously allowing for open limits on Big Guys and a very open system. This will provide more balance than the current system, which sprawls a little too much.

In the end, coaches would get many choices, with no "obvious" winning "ally combos". It will not be 'equal' from a numbers standpoint, but it will certainly be more 'balanced.'

(Really cool, and coming soon - I promise!)

I like the 'fast and loose' feel to the current rules, and only worry that some teams have access to so much more than other squads.

The no-re-roll restriction is great.

Declarations
I think this rule is 100% gravy. No changes, as we played this way already after the last round of 3E playtesting.

Sigurd's Injury Table
Again, no changes necessary. A great rule. However, in the interest of providing more attrition and granting more uniformity to the old 1-3/4-5/6 division of most d6 rolls, I would like to suggest that the SI table be expanded as follows:

1-3   Miss one week
4-5   Niggling injury
6   Stat reducer

(Fill in with d66 as needed, but you get the point.)

This would promote more niggling injuries and higher turnover. SI's simply aren't 'serious' enough at the moment.

New Teams
The Snotling team needs work, although a change to Titchy to make it work like a 'reverse Stunty,' possibly combined with a price jump to 30K, should take care of it.

The Unicorn...well, I think this player ought to go. If you don't have hands, you can't really play Blood Bowl. Allowing this player opens the door for all manner of pets: Squigs, Giant Rats, Cold Ones, Pegasi, Dragons, etc. If it can't strap on a helmet and pads, it probably doesn't belong on the pitch.

I'd add an Araby team, too, as follows:

Qty Title Cost MA ST AG AV Skills Traits
0-12 Lineman 50,000 7 3 3 7 None None
0-2 Thrower 70,000 7 3 3 7 Sure Hands, Pass None
0-4 Eunuch Blocker 80,000 5 4 2 8 None None
0-4 Dervish 90,000 7 3 3 7 None Frenzy, Dauntless
Re-roll counter: 40,000 gold pieces each

The following chart shows the allowed skills for Araby players:

Title General Agility Strength Passing Physical
Lineman *        
Thrower *     *  
Eunuch Blocker *   *    
Dervish * *      

Araby teams would be allowed Human and Khemri allies. I know a split is popular with some folks, but the Norse "choose good or evil" split never did anything for me, and it disappeared in 4E, so for consistency's sake, I went with the same approach here. These Araby are a lot like, well...another cool shade of Human, I guess. Can never have enough, you know!

Re-rolls
Wouldn't change a thing here, except to remove the ref roll bit to a separate die roll, both to avoid confusion and to facilitate a better IGMEOY.

Wizards
This rule works just fine, although a simple "does not cause a turnover" change would still allow a coach to use his wizard at any time.

Regardless, the roll needed to cast a successful ZAP! spell should be dropped to 4 or more, rather than the current 5. As it stands now, this spell is never cast. Furthermore, JJ's online game-designer chat (I have a transcript!) suggests that 5+ is a hedge, and playtesting should determine whether to bump the number to 6, or drop it to 4. In this case, it should definitely drop. Finally, only players can use team re-rolls, judging by the rules; with such a restriction, you'll rarely hit a ZAP!, and the wiggle room on a scatter is too large.

Hand-offs
I'd possibly consider allowing a player to make a hand-off and continue his move, similar to a Blitz.

Regardless, I'd ditch the bit about a hand-off being a "second Pass action" and simply come up with an actual "Hand-Off Action". This makes the mechanic clearer. You can then change the relevent Special Plays in the Pre-Match Preparations section to read "Blitz, Pass, or Hand-Off," as needed.


Cheers! If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to e-mail me at chz@buffalo.edu. And above all - ENJOY!