Page 4 of 4

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:40 pm
by Regash
Bakunin wrote:The rules are clear, you dont have to roll for Injury... So if you dont want to, then dont roll for AV.
To be honest, I don't think so.
Not rolling for injury just prevents to see the result of that injury.
But breaking the armor does have an effect: at least the guy on the ground is stunned!

So I'd say, since the AV roll is mandatory, if you break the armor and don't want to roll for injury, just mark him stunned!
That way, it at least makes a bit of sense if we assume the least bad outcome of an injury roll for granted.

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:52 pm
by Be4ch
Regash wrote:To be honest, I don't think so.
Not rolling for injury just prevents to see the result of that injury.
But breaking the armor does have an effect: at least the guy on the ground is stunned!
Erm, not really. "Stunned" is a result on the Injury table. If you're not going to roll for an injury how can he be stunned? He'd be on his back, prone, the same as if you didn't break armour which brings us back to why bother to make the AV roll in the first place?

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 8:12 pm
by Darkson
Be4ch wrote:Erm, not really. "Stunned" is a result on the Injury table. If you're not going to roll for an injury how can he be stunned? He'd be on his back, prone, the same as if you didn't break armour which brings us back to why bother to make the AV roll in the first place?
This. Regesh, you even posted the same in the post after mine: viewtopic.php?f=24&t=42784&start=15#p755082

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 8:17 pm
by Regash
Just because I think it would make more sense if you have to roll for armor.
Assuming the least bad result because armor was broken.

But since I never adopted any playstyle that would let me think an opponent player on the board would be a better solution than crack his skull...
I just don't think I'll ever come into a situation where I'll drop the injury roll. :orc:

Chain pushes are for sissies! :wink:
It's BLOOD Bowl, not Push Bowl! :lol:
Darkson wrote:you even posted the same in the post after mine: viewtopic.php?f=24&t=42784&start=15#p755082
Well, after thinking about it for a couple of hours...
I just thought this might be a solution were
  1. the mandatory armor roll makes sense
  2. the broken AV makes sense
  3. you still can leave the opponent on the board to make your chain pushes.

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 9:27 pm
by Darkson
I thought you didn't like house rules. ;)

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 4:18 am
by Regash
Darkson wrote:I thought you didn't like house rules. ;)
That isn't house rules!
That is interpretation! :lol:

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 2:53 pm
by CyberedElf
My 2 cents.
Unless the rules state otherwise, any player that is Knocked Down may be injured. The opposing coach rolls two D6 and adds their scores together in an attempt to try to beat the Knocked Down player's Armour value. If the roll succeeds, then the opposing coach is allowed to roll on the Injury table
There are cases in the rules where "may" does not imply an option and is read the same as "might." It "may" happen depending on the die rolls or previous actions, not depending on a current choice.
Examples:
the thrower may completely fumble the throw
the ball may be intercepted by an opposing player
Star Player points which may give them Improvement rolls
Journeymen may take the total players on the team . . . to more than 16
it may take you above 11 players (x2)
the current Action may be lost
A bomb may be intercepted or caught
On a roll of 4+, he may use the team re-roll as normal.
before the re-roll may be made, his coach must roll a D6.
and many more where the idea of a choice when it says "may" would make no sense

Similarly "is allowed" can be based on previous events not choice. The language does not require to be interpreted as choice, but could be in comparison to the converse. If the armor roll is failed the injury roll is not allowed.

Given that Tom (and most of the other respondents) thinks the injury roll should be required, and the rules can be interpreted that way, I know where I stand.

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 3:56 pm
by Bakunin
My 2 cents is that its best to play as the rules read, not what the game designer thinks.

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Sat May 07, 2016 12:33 pm
by Be4ch
CyberedElf wrote:There are cases in the rules where "may" does not imply an option and is read the same as "might." It "may" happen depending on the die rolls or previous actions, not depending on a current choice. .......

Similarly "is allowed" can be based on previous events not choice. The language does not require to be interpreted as choice, but could be in comparison to the converse. If the armor roll is failed the injury roll is not allowed.
That's where I am on it as well. It's not indicating a choice, it's pointing out that you may only roll on the injury table if the armour is broken. If it isn't, you may not.

Re: 3 Questions: Take Root, Injury Roll and skill use

Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2016 6:46 am
by Xeterog
interesting that technically you can play a bloodless game of blood bowl if you wanted to....