Talk Fantasy Football

Answer the question please.

Within the Black and White rules you cannot disengage the declaration from the want.

No, I didn't decide only when I said it, does that help you?

Are you going to accuse me of cheating again, which rule did I break?

The decision *must* come before the sound leaves your mouth - at the very least there must be time for the impulses from your brain to reach the mouth muscles in order to make the statement. Even that much delay between wanting to do it and declaring that you "will" means the want comes before the declaration.

I mean, anyone can see what is happening here: you're desperately trying to find a semantic argument which supports your interpretation while at the same time saying I'm making a semantic argument and trying to dismiss it as one! Even if you do find one (and there may well be one) all it does is establish doubt rather than clarity as to the intent of the interaction - at best you could argue it is one or the other through such a position, since if your semantic argument is valid through equivocation then so is mine.

dode74 wrote:Either meaning of the word "will" works: you establish the want to do something before you declare you will (either meaning) do it.

It is the Player, not the Coach that 'Wants' in the skill description of Foul Appearance. That very coach has declared his future intention to Block, the Will, before the player gets involved.

Are you honestly telling me that the Player Wants to throw a block, he rolls FA, and then if successful the PLAYER declares to the defending player that he now Will make the block?

Thought you only cared about the rules? sounds like you are delving into any manner of sciences now; physiology, neurology, psychology.

In the context of the rules you cannot disengage the Declaration from the Want. As I said before I can see your point and can 100% see how GW could FAQ FA before DO but as the rules stand you don't have the leverage to say FA must be done before DO, maybe agree with your opponent beforehand if you come to this situation in the real world.

I think we have happily pushed this as far as it will go. As you point out any external observer can read and digest our points at leisure.

Fair warning - I'm going to lock this before someone says anything they will regret. If you want to leave a final comment Dode do it in the next hour or so

*Picks up big wooden spoon*
Your FA guy is stood one square from the end zone on turn 16, the game is 1-1. None of my guys are within blitz range. I "want" to block him, but I can't. Am I still rolling dice for FA..?

BillyDee wrote:*Picks up big wooden spoon*
Your FA guy is stood one square from the end zone on turn 16, the game is 1-1. None of my guys are within blitz range. I "want" to block him, but I can't. Am I still rolling dice for FA..?

You're too late Itchen said something like this about 3 pages ago

*Puts big wooden spoon away*

Itchen Masack wrote:It is the Player, not the Coach that 'Wants' in the skill description of Foul Appearance. That very coach has declared his future intention to Block, the Will, before the player gets involved.

Are you honestly telling me that the Player Wants to throw a block, he rolls FA, and then if successful the PLAYER declares to the defending player that he now Will make the block?

I think it is also the player who is referenced in DO, despite your incredulity.

This skill allows the player to make a Quick Pass when an opponent declares that he will throw a block at him...

The target is the player, not the coach, since it is the player being blocked. That means the subject of the sentence is the player, and since we know it is not the coach throwing the block but an opposing player then "opponent" references that player.

Loki wrote:Thought you only cared about the rules? sounds like you are delving into any manner of sciences now; physiology, neurology, psychology.

I don't think I said I *only* care about what the rulebook says. And if it is necessary to utilise other disciplines to determine what is actually going on then that is sound practice.

In the context of the rules you cannot disengage the Declaration from the Want.

And yet I have, because your "want" happens before your declaration. Because science.

As I said before I can see your point and can 100% see how GW could FAQ FA before DO but as the rules stand you don't have the leverage to say FA must be done before DO, maybe agree with your opponent beforehand if you come to this situation in the real world.

And you have no leverage to say DO before FA. Sure, I'd discuss it beforehand if anyone ever takes FA and DO on the same player, but I think we've established that *at best* it is ambiguous.

BillyDee wrote:*Picks up big wooden spoon*
Your FA guy is stood one square from the end zone on turn 16, the game is 1-1. None of my guys are within blitz range. I "want" to block him, but I can't. Am I still rolling dice for FA..?

If you want, assuming you've declared a Block Action or a Blitz Action first. Seems like a waste of time, though, as it will change nothing since you can't actually block whether you pass or fail.

Anyway, thank you for indulging me. No hard feelings I hope and I think it stayed fairly calm throughout. Not sure why you're locking, but ok.

No reason for it to be locked, so unlocked.

You could ask someone that still has access to the PBeM tool to try it out, as Tom did all the programming for that - I would try it, but I don't seem to have the tool anymore (not sure why!).

dode74 wrote:

This skill allows the player to make a Quick Pass when an opponent declares that he will throw a block at him...

The target is the player, not the coach, since it is the player being blocked. That means the subject of the sentence is the player, and since we know it is not the coach throwing the block but an opposing player then "opponent" references that player.

Loki wrote: In the context of the rules you cannot disengage the Declaration from the Want.

And yet I have, because your "want" happens before your declaration. Because science.

I like this As Coach my input into the game is a lot less than i thought.

1. As Coach I declare a Block Action for Player A
2. Time to sit back, my work here is done.
3. Player A decides that he Wants to block player X (skilled with FA & DO) so rolls his 2+ FA check
4. Player A then quite politely, and somewhat surprisingly, tells player X that he Will now block him triggering Dump Off choice.