Re: Rules for new card decks?
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:45 pm
The cards are optional.
Discuss Fantasy football-style board games - GW's Blood Bowl, Impact!'s Elfball, Privateer Press' Grind, Heresy's Deathball, etc. THIS IS NOT AN NFL FANTASY FOOTBALL SITE!
https://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/
https://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=44245
Indeed, everyone seem to understand this apart from the guy above. We've been through this before in another thread too. In fact here is the quote from the previous thread to back this up.stashman wrote:Not optional - extra rules (like loads of 'standard' rules)
garion wrote:This quote which JYT keeps talking about precedes all player costing, kick off table, star players, the weather, going for it, handing off the ball. All the player skills. So please stop with the cop out replies. We all use all everything in the aforementioned list as part of the core rules.EXTRA RULES
All of the following extra rules are optional. This means that both coaches must agree which extra rules (if any) they are going to use before the match starts. However, they are all highly recommended and you’ll find that using them provides an even more exciting and interesting game without slowing down the mayhem and destruction much at all! Give ’em a try!
After the rule book we have DZ 1 - after the team rosters which in JYTs opinion are option rules apparently, we have in block letters along the top of the page -NEW OFFICIAL RULES, on this page there are a number of quotes I could pull from this page if I was so inclined, that point at the things from rule book 1 Extra Rules section that have to be followed to use these NEW OFFICIAL RULES.
Then after this section another clear delineation for OPTIONAL LEAGUE RULES and it clearly states - free fan factor is one of these OPTIONAL rules. Thus not a core rule.
Lets take a look at the new book again DZ2 it clearly separates "NEW OPTIONAL RULES" from the rest of the rules. There is a very clear and deliberate delineation here. Then after the "NEW OPTIONAL RULES" it says "NEW RULES" where it has more core inducement rules.
This delineation is true throughout each LRB and 2016 edition. There are the core rules, which i would describe as the recommended way to play the core game and standard leagues.
As you can see above there is a clear separation of the 'optional rules'.
EXTRA RULES
All of the following extra rules are optional...
Enh, I'm going to disagree with you on several levels.garion wrote:Indeed, everyone seem to understand this apart from the guy above. We've been through this before in another thread too. In fact here is the quote from the previous thread to back this up.stashman wrote:Not optional - extra rules (like loads of 'standard' rules)
In short though - 'Extra Rules' are not "Optional Rules" There is a BIG difference. Extra rules are the slightly more advanced than basic rules that EVERYONE uses to play the game.
You mean, your request to have us share copyrighted information with you? I'm sorry, but I personally do not feel comfortable with doing that, regardless of whether or not the cards were including in the rules before.fanglord13 wrote:Can we not having pissing contest over the relative merits of the cards (old system was fine) and help with the original query?
+1Milo wrote:You mean, your request to have us share copyrighted information with you? I'm sorry, but I personally do not feel comfortable with doing that, regardless of whether or not the cards were including in the rules before.fanglord13 wrote:Can we not having pissing contest over the relative merits of the cards (old system was fine) and help with the original query?
I find arguments like this at the edges of the debate difficult to sympathise with. Yes, strictly speaking, by default and playing rigidly by the book, one coach could nope any of the 'extra rules'. But in reality, until cards reappeared in this section of the rulebook, when has that ever happened to anyone? By that logic, I as a Khemri coach can veto (for instance) the weather table or handoffs because I’m playing against High Elves and I like them moving the ball on 2+ little and the rain troubling my pickups even less. But (to Garion's point), no-one does that, it's not a thing.Milo wrote:Second, as you've kindly quoted already, all of the "extra rules" come with the clause that they are "optional" and must be agreed upon by both coaches. Of course, leagues or tournaments can modify this clause to either restrict or enforce their usage, but by default, if one coach objects to it, you would play the game without them.
Its not a pissing contest, we cant post the rules here. I'm sure if you just chatted to people on discord though someone might be able to give you some short hand info about what they do roughly....fanglord13 wrote:Can we not having pissing contest over the relative merits of the cards (old system was fine) and help with the original query?
Yes it would be excellent if the rules could be sorted out as they are messy as heck currently.Milo wrote: That said, your point is reasonable: I agree with you that the rules should be clearer about what is core, standard, extra, and optional rules. Of course, it's too late to change in the BB2016 rulebook, DZ1 or DZ2, but I'll keep it in mind when other rulebooks are worked on by the playtest group and try to get the group to make these clearer.
Good, glad that's the case. Now if you can just get the rule book to clarify, currently lumping cards in with Passing does not suggest they are optional, it suggests they are Extra rules or Advanced rules (which imo is a better name). I know Extra rules is prefixed by a sentence declaring they are optional but this is a complete nonsense when passing, GFIs, player costing is included there. So it does need sorting out imo.JT-Y wrote:Honestly I understand perfectly well. The cards are optional. I'm not asking you, I'm telling you. Cards, IP, 4 minute turns, they are all optional.
I also played 3rd ed and the game was a different animal then, it was no where near as balanced then you are comparing apples and oranges really. I also look back on that era with rose tinted specs but really the game has improved massively since then in every sense. Which you will know being a big part of the stream lining for the rule set between 2000 - 2003. At which point lrb3 was in very good shape, and then lrb4 even better.Milo wrote: First of all, I don't consider the game to be better, more fun, or more strategic to play without cards. I think they add an unknown element that a good coach needs to be aware of and strategically try to minimize the impact of. I played for years with the 3rd Edition cards, which are far more powerful than the current versions, when they were just part of the game. I find their inclusion in the current rules very well balanced (if you use the optional Special Play Card rules, which I always would.) I recognize that there are a lot of people who don't like them, but it's a fallacy to say that's true across the board
+49Milo wrote:You mean, your request to have us share copyrighted information with you? I'm sorry, but I personally do not feel comfortable with doing that, regardless of whether or not the cards were including in the rules before.fanglord13 wrote:Can we not having pissing contest over the relative merits of the cards (old system was fine) and help with the original query?
Normally yes but the complaint about price made me hesitate.fanglord13 wrote:Can we not having pissing contest over the relative merits of the cards (old system was fine) and help with the original query?
True, most of the other "Extra Rules" (agree with Garion that it could use a name change to "Advanced Rules") are uncontroversial aspects of the game that most people consider as "core game functionality". I'm simply stating that the rules already allow for one coach to veto the cards if they are strongly opposed to them.Purplegoo wrote:I find arguments like this at the edges of the debate difficult to sympathise with. Yes, strictly speaking, by default and playing rigidly by the book, one coach could nope any of the 'extra rules'. But in reality, until cards reappeared in this section of the rulebook, when has that ever happened to anyone? By that logic, I as a Khemri coach can veto (for instance) the weather table or handoffs because I’m playing against High Elves and I like them moving the ball on 2+ little and the rain troubling my pickups even less. But (to Garion's point), no-one does that, it's not a thing.Milo wrote:Second, as you've kindly quoted already, all of the "extra rules" come with the clause that they are "optional" and must be agreed upon by both coaches. Of course, leagues or tournaments can modify this clause to either restrict or enforce their usage, but by default, if one coach objects to it, you would play the game without them.
Let me explain what I mean by strategically minimizing the impact of cards, and please forgive me if I use some 3rd Edition card references here -- they are the ones I remember the best and I don't have the new cards in front of me at the moment. There are a number of cards which could allow you to move extra distance, always succeed with difficult blocks, even get an extra blitz on the ball carrier when they step into the end zone. If you know your opponent has a card that could be one of these, you may choose to make extra defensive moves before scoring, and you might not wait until the last turn to score your touchdown. You might choose to avoid the sidelines because your opponent could have a card that has a negative effect for you near the sidelines. Of course, some cards can't be minimized. That's true.Purplegoo wrote:I can see why cards exist. I think some players like a bit of randomisation, perhaps there is an argument newer players are drawn in by crazy things happening, they’re creative and fluffy, they’re collectables, they're revenue streams… There are a lot of good points to them. However, I would guess there are significantly more experienced BB coaches (whatever that means to you) that dislike the game becoming more random than those that welcome card effects. Garion is right, the game becomes less strategic when the cards are in play by default; whether that is a good or a bad thing is a matter of taste. ‘Cards used to be a thing’ is an argument I’ve seen elsewhere, but so did a lot of things. BB has matured to a really good spot where skill, strategy and luck have struck an uneasy balance that is largely successful, cards (in my opinion) are an unwelcome addition to that equation. They’re fine as inducements, no argument there, underdogs getting a welcome, impactful surprise is a decent mechanic. But every game, as standard? And that’s before you get into what the card rules actually are; the box is different to DZ 1 is different to an optional (there’s that word again) document on the website; even if you have it all infront of you it’s not super clear. I think it safest to assume that the majority of people that bought BB2016 are playing with the decks from the base box to the base box rules, not everyone is driven to keep up with iterations as they arrive over different formats. And that is…. Well. Going to produce some mental Blood Bowl. I'd love to know how I can strategically minimise Blackmail and it's ilk happening multiple times, every game.
You make some good points here. I agree that the special play cards should probably have been organized differently. There are three rules in the "Extra Rules" which are probably the most commonly house ruled out: Illegal Procedure, four minute time limit, and the Special Play cards. Each of them is couched in very conditional wording (emphasis mine):Purplegoo wrote:Local ‘not in the system’ leagues can happily do as they please with universal blessing. The unease comes when you’re playing in a large, perhaps national or international (perhaps online) league or tournament. In such an environment, there is commonly a necessity to resolutely use ‘core’ rules faithful to the book; the thing falls apart when you’re including thing x you like and thing y you don’t because there will always be a percentage of the player base that kicks off at your choice and it spirals out of control (that’s true of some local leagues too, of course. The easy default position for any LC or TO in any dispute is ‘we’ll do as the standard rules say’ because that is a rock solid, inarguable and unbiased position). There has to be an accepted standard, and commonly that is everything but the optional rules. I think that’s why this matters to people; regardless of what is said on the internet about the intent of cards and who says it, those of us that play in those environments are likely going to have to play with cards because of how they sit in print. It surprised me that the NAF have sidestepped using the cards because the principled argument is probably that they should be 'in', but I'm certainly not complaining!
Where? is there a hidden part to this website, as you have directed people here a few times and when I go there i see nothing of use? Only a facebook wall (a social media platform I will not use) and some art work you can download for desktop themes and some very very basic info about the starter teams.Milo wrote:The variant card rules posted on BloodBowl.com fix that problem, but -- as you mention -- only if a coach knows about the site and goes looking for them
I strongly strongly disagree with you here. Especially when subsequent rule books point to this section of the book with reference to these rules as core rules and non optional and almost everything else here is so integral to playing the game.Milo wrote:It's a false equivalence to say that just because these Special Play card rules are included in the same section, they are not presented as optional. The wording is distinctly different for them.
That's all well and good I enjoy the narrative too. Though as I have mentioned before keep the core game strong and YOU can use all the "optional" rules you wish, rather than pushing the luck factor in the game up for everyone. It shows disregard for how many many people play the game. Especially the long term competitive players. There are many worrying things about the current rules that could and absolutely should have been avoided. Keeping the rules strategy centric for the competitive player and silly for the funsters are not mutually exclusive. Both can easily be achieving with well thought out rules and organisation of the rules.Milo wrote:I personally think the cards make for a better narrative experience in Blood Bowl leagues. That's what I play in leagues for -- not just the competition of trying to win, but the stories that come out of individual games and amazing feats or disastrous luck.
But many many people do, this is a hotter topic than I think you realise.Milo wrote: I don't see this as a major concern.
So if you can please fix it in the next release.Milo wrote: I think it probably would have made sense to separate these three out (maybe the Star Players too) into an "Optional Rules" section, with some boilerplate text saying that you can feel free to include or exclude them as you wish. (And again, I lament the fact that the vastly superior variant Special Play card rules weren't included here instead.