Garions Rules Finished

Got some ideas for rules? Maybe a skill change or something completely different!!! Tell us here.

Moderator: TFF Mods

Post Reply
Rhyoth
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:51 pm
Location: Rennes, France

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by Rhyoth »

voyagers_uk wrote:that is an interesting point Rhyoth, any ideas on how to fix that?
I think making poor skills worth 10k, and top skills 30k , is worth testing, although it may require several adjsutements (SE should be changed, and some Inducements made more expensive).

Of course, we can toy a bit more with this concept, and end up with something like this :
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=35407

note : Also, if top skills cost 30k, maybe there is no need to pay an extra 10k for doubles anymore, which woul give more opportunities on double roll as well.

Reason: ''
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by garion »

Rhyoth wrote:_ Dolfar : he costs the same as a merc with kick, but comes with 3 bonus skills (sure they're not outstanding skills, but hey, they're free), so how can he be a bad deal ?
So, unless you make mercs cheaper, there is no reason to change him (or at least, not for free).

Its a bad deal because those skills are pretty much worthless. I would like it to be a harder choice between Dolphar and 2 babes frankly. At the moment he is just not even worth considering. You can also get him on High Elf teams. Personally I would prefer a merc in the current rules over him, because he has av7 and i would get no use out of any of his skills other than kick. In all my games i have played TT and online leagues and online MM I have never once seen him taken. He is just not even a consideration at the moment. Getting rid of the pointless Diving Tackle and giving him Wrestle at least allows him to function as a team member. Otherwise i would rather him not be on the field, because rookie linemen are better at blocking and doging than him and he is meant to be a star.

_ Amazons :
Again be careful about fluff quotes, they're often exagerated : in this case, they just mean zons start with Dodge... True, it is often exagerrated, but the fluff for every other team fits their team perfectly. Zons Teams don't come close to resembling the fluff in CRP and pre CRP. This is what all teams need to be based around first and foremost, it is the most important factor in team design along with balance and fun.

The same goes for Stand Firm : if Stand Firm gives a bonus to dodge, it's to represent the fact that the player is too strong/large/heavy to be tackled effectively : that's why it's a Strength skill, requiring a Strength roll, and why only slow but strong and heavy player like Deathroller, Treemen or Flesh Golem have it as a starting skill (and i bet those players aren't exactly "graceful" when they "dodge"). It is a strength skill yes, but it still makes the sort of plays that they apparently famous for possible, and the team is decribed as having a mix of strenght and other things, as quoted before. Without it they are far less likely to ever happen. Also after looking at many of the top Amazons teams on fumbbl and through playing them a lot back in lrb4) it became quite clear that Blitzers were used in two ways, 1 was the MB PO player, the others main function would be to tie players up, essentially working as Blockers not Blitzers. Stand Firm was a very common skill selection at the 4th and 5th skill for this player, and by removing block it stop them being blodge guard after one skill which is a nightmare for any low tv teams, but by the 4th or 5th skill they are back on track, so it doesnt hurt them long term.

AV 8 : since giving those girls an AV increase clearly goes against their fluff, then it should used only as a last measure, only if all other options available failed (unless you find a suitable concept for an AV8 piece : like some kind of dangerous monster from Lustrians jungles, or maybe some kind of armored male slave used as human shield...). this does not go against their fluff. Av8 is not an indicator of their armour alone, otherwise everyone would just stick plate mail on. It is a value given to a player that represents their natural toughness and ability to take knocks. Since the blitzers are descibed as 'powerful warriors' and i could provide you with a number of quotes if you really want, that lend them self to this, there is nothing out of place with it. It also makes their roster more interesting, as said before the 6337 across the board is just unimagiative, dull and it allows very little room for tactical use as a player type, in crp all their players basically run interfearance while one scores. Finally it is a slight help for the long term build.

_ Norse :
garion wrote:its not about spoiling the fun, as posted before, it is to make the rules consistent, runners have P access like Dark Elves. It is more to give them the choice of going down the Dump Off route and specialising in the running game as per their fluff and not the passing game.
it's what this rule will do : spoil the fun of a few number of player, for no good reason :
_ the Thrower does not make the team overpowered
_ the Thrower does not make the team too much "Pass-oriented", since a lot of ccoach just skip him anyway
_ there is no need to give Runners P skills, just like there is no need to give Elf Blitzers S skills : sure they have the same name, but they play in very different team, have different use, and thus different profile.
_ as far as the dumpster route is concerned, it's a more viable option for the current Thrower, than it would be for this Runner : for him, it simply requires too many sacrifices.
Im at work at the moment, so cant provide quotes but i will update later, I have already explained that i want the 3 human teams to be different to each other as the fluff suggests, Norse are a bash team, human a flexible team, and Zons a passing team. There is no fluff that would suggest the norse would have a thrower, they are a team built around bash. The thrower is out of place. It is simple as that. He does not belong on this team, yes people may not develop runners as throwers, but they have that option now as a late skill choice. Norse are not meant to be flexible in their approach to games, they are all about aggresive kamikaze tactics, which sometimes win them games and sometimes doesn't, Frenzy is what they are all about, why would they have throwers when they don't have catchers, because they are not meant to have these types of players or perform these types of plays it goes against everything you read. the fact you say well why not give Elf Blitzers S then, is just a flippant comment. You know perfectly well why they don't. Running back on the other hand is a basic position in Amercian Football. While in amarican football they play along side QBs typically, bloodbowl obviously works differently because a fair number of teams dont have QBs, especially those focused on bash and it is the role of the player that is important. Running Backs are typically either handed the ball by the QB or they will receive it straight from the snap. If a team has two (which norse do) one will function has a half back/tail back and they will run with the ball, the other, the full back will function as a Blocker supporting the runner. This is very much how Norse play, the spare one fronting a cage with blodge SS. Half Backs also do throw the ball albeit rarely, but again that supports giving them the ability to take P skills and Dump Off plays are more common than straight passes for those player types, so this change adds verisimilitude and also makes the teams consistent. Dark Elf runners annd Norse Runners are the same position, the difference is norse play an 'Up the middle' running play, or a 'Draw'. while Dark Elf runners play a 'Counter' running play most of the time or an 'End-Around'. But the basic function of the Runners is universal and as such should be reflected in their ability to make certain plays.

Reason: ''
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by garion »

Rhyoth wrote:
Garion wrote:This is not correct, after studying a huge amounts of teams in lrb6 and lrb4 and looking at the most common development paths in lrb4 and the way doubles were used. I can say that LRB4 did have more diverse skill selection. Though you are right that this is because of skill limiting. But again I do not have a problem with this, in fact i think it is a good thing.
I think you're jumping to conclusion : a lot of changes affecting team player/development happened between Lrb4 & 5. Out of those changes, at least 2 had a major negative impact on the diversity of skill selection (probably much more than removing Traits) : Inducements and Spiralling Expenses.
Because of those 2 changes, "fun", "experimental" or "just-in-case" improvements tend to disappear, simply because they don't worth the TV increase, and put the team too much at a disadvantage. I agree, which is one of the main reasons I returned to TV gain system somewhere between LRB4 and CRP and withdrew the extra cost of doubles that you get in CRP. Instead of paying for skills like in CRP you pay for the number of skills a player has which is more in line with LRB4 though I didnt want to go the whole way back because LRB4 had some big problems around that area.

So, comparing LRB4 and CRP data just can't prove anything here : you simply can't determine what is due to the Inducements system (or other changes), and what's specifically due to Traits. (Comparing 3rd ed and LRB4 data would probably be more accurate). Also, using the "way doubles are used" as an indicator is irrelevant here : since removing Traits globally improve the variety of skill selection, by increasing the variety of skill selection on normal rolls, but reducing it on double rolls. It gives you more skill options yes, but it also means that people can just ignore the skills that are not considered tier 1. or just short of tier1. It can still be easily compared to LRB4 because LRB4 often forced you into taking skills you otherwise wouldn't because of lack of "tier 1" skills. I loved this and many others did too. At least it meant we saw skills like pass block taken more often, even if it was somewhat forced. For example - I have data that showed how frequently Nerves of Steel was taken on a double on specific players, which seems insane today, since no one bothers with it on a single roll but due to the skill limiting people took alternate skills, the other factor you mention could be because people were not charged for skill cost, well again, my rules do not, they charge people for number of skills taken, which is more inline with SPP =TR of LRB4. Also the way that my rules enourage even team skill distribution instead of stars and scrubs you get in the current rules, more linemen will be developed to reasonable level, each with different roles in the team, again more in line with LRB4.
Garion wrote:If a player takes a trait then their subsequent skill selection will change as a result so the new skills they take support that skills ability and so they can stack their traits with other skills to make them more effective
Again, you would build the same player without Traits : if a player takes Frenzy, his subsequent skills will be the same*, wether or not he needed a double to acquire Frenzy in the first place.
Traits don't create new development paths , they just make already existing paths less frequent. Yes they make some of the more common ones less frequent which is a good thing imo, for the reasons stated above. Frenzy for example, is far too common a skill now. Personally I would like to make a bunch of other skills traits too. I would rather Jump Up returned to its original form and Dauntless too, but i haven't for reasons im not going into here, Traits doubles and stat increases, just give you more selection when you are lucky, it means there are more options when you roll these things, it gives you harder decisisions when skilling up,

*'of course, with your Traits, this player will have 2 valuable option less to consider if does not roll a second double... To conclude, if you want to really want to increase the diversity of skills/development paths, first you need to stop focusing so much on double skill choices, and start worrying about why coaches always take the same skills on normal rolls. Personnally i see 2 evident problems :
_ skills are inequally attractive
_ the inducements system and SE punish too much coaches for taking sub-par skills
Since Traits don't adress those problems, they can only have a very marginal impact on skill diversity.
I am also glad that skills are inequally attractive. If all skills were of the same ability it would make everything more boring. Some skills will always be taken less, and it is when they are taken and they win you a game they become so joyous. It is like Magic the Gathering, finding cards that look pants to begin with then when they win you a game, it is a great feeling, so when in my rules you begrugingly take Pass block because you cant see any other skills you would like, then find it has won you a game, that is a great moment, and one that happened in lrb4 but never happens now. I wouldn't want to see skills tiered by cost. I think it would actually be detrimental to the game, I think it would be horrible for new comers to the game, that they basically get told from the start, these skills are not as good as these ones. I loved learning about the game and with each rule set learning which skills were great and which skill combos were good. I would hate to be patronised and told take these ones, and these ones arent worth much, so you should mostly avoid them

Edit: Also about SE. that will be increased too. It just need play testing to work out it out really. If i was to take a guess it would start from 2000TV, that was in my rules, but because I'm not totally sure about that yet, I have left it out for now.

Reason: ''
voyagers_uk
Da Cynic
Posts: 7462
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Location: Nice Red Uniforms and Fanatical devotion to the Pope!

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by voyagers_uk »

just a thought Garion and I am sure one that would be too difficult to implement.....

did you ever play WFRP?

the career paths for advancement were pretty locked down, but there were opportunities to shift if something wasn't working, however you could only shift to certain other roles and only after gaining certain experience.

I am just playing with ideas, but if skills were laid out, not only in categories, but also in tables so a Killer table, a QB(or baller) table, a basic table etc. Sort of how 2ed skills tables were laid out. then you were restricted to only having a certain number of players who could be that role. and others had to pick from tables/categories that were just missing certain skills.

for example. I have a Chaos Warrior who comes in brand new onto developed team who lost a killer, we overpower the opposition and he gets to 16spps in the first match (rare, but not unheard of)

he has 2 skills to pick up and rolls normal for both, he can pick basic skills, such as tackle, guard, mighty blow, grab etc, or he can pick from the killer table, piling on, mighty blow etc. it allows you to target development in clearer paths. and once using that table you have to only pick skills in that table

the tables would have to be expansive enough to allow for doubles and mutations access, but that should not be too hard to do for a dedicated commish.

killer could then replace the tag of blocker, which is outdated and just bugs me when they normally don't have block...., so Orcs would just have Black Orcs, not black orc blockers etc. nothing to stop them being developed as killers.... just coaches choice.

so Career tables would allow coaches to develop specialists (limited in number) and generalists who may only differ by a couple of skills. it would provide greater certainty over skill paths and allow for more choice.

your thoughts?

Reason: ''
Image
Ikterus wrote: But for the record, play Voyagers_UK if you have the chance. He's cursed! :P
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by garion »

No I never played it but I know where you are coming from.

another Idea I toyed with for a while with Colin (he has another name here, i forget) was something similar though not quite as restrictive. The problem with your idea, which i did consider is the it makes passing players almost obselete, same with catchers really, although i may be miss understanding a little ???

It was splitting the skills up in to positional catagories.

I will try and find the finished version, but it was something like this -

(t) = traits

Blocker
Stand Firm (t)
Block
Guard
Fend
Thick Skull
Mighty Blow
Break Tackle
Grab

Blitzer
Block
Wrestle
Frenzy (t)
Dauntless
Strip Ball

Strength wanted a different name for this but couldnt think of one
Pile On (t)
Stand Firm (t)
Might Blow
Break Tackle
Jugganaut
Guard
Grab

Catcher
Catch
Diving Catch
NoS

Thrower
Strong Arm (t)
Leader (t)
Pass
Accurate
Hail Mary Pass
Dump Off

Lineman
Wrestle
Fend
Tackle
Dirty Player
Kick
Sure Hands
Pro

Finesse
Diving Tackle
Side Step
Dodge
Jump Up
Leap

Stunty
Dirty Player
Sneaky Git
Side Step
Diving Tackle
Jump Up

So as you can guess Stunty players only have access to stunty skills, and on a double anything other than traits from the other catagories.

Orc Blockers or Chaos Warriors, would only have access to Blocker catagory.
Linemen would only have access to Linemen skills
all elves would have accesss to finesse skills
All Blitzers have access to Blitzer skills.
Orc Blitzers also have access to strength skills and so on.
Big Guys just get St skills,
as you can see stunty only have 5 skills available to them and big guys only have 4 so like LRB4 once you have used up all your skills you can access to another catagory of your choice.

I'm sure you can work out the rest.

But we never really continued down this path, it just seemed a little un-needed even though it does have definate benefits over the current skill selection system.

Personally I just found the lrb4 traits perfect, and made for great variety in leagues, opponents rarely felt like you were playing the same team twice, now i find most teams feel too similr to each other and I find the teams do not fit their character as much as they used to in the days of traits.

Reason: ''
voyagers_uk
Da Cynic
Posts: 7462
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Location: Nice Red Uniforms and Fanatical devotion to the Pope!

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by voyagers_uk »

KILLER
Stand Firm
Block
Guard
Fend
Thick Skull
Mighty Blow
Break Tackle
Grab
Piling On
Claw
Dirty Player
Frenzy
Juggernaut
Tackle
Pro
Multiple Block
tentacles
horns
disturbing presence


STANDARD
Block
Wrestle
Dauntless
Strip Ball
Stand Firm
Might Blow
Break Tackle
Guard
Grab
Dirty Player
Kick
Sure Hands
tackle
diving tackle
dodge
sneaky git
sprint
hail mary pass
Pro
prehensile tail
foul appearance
horns
spikes

BALLER
Catch
Diving Catch
NoS
Strong Arm
Leader
Pass
Accurate
Hail Mary Pass
Dump Off
Pro
fend
sure feet
leap
shadowing
jump up
two heads
extra arms
sprint
pass
accurate
dump off
safe throw
kick off return
pass block
catch
big hand
disturbing presence
very long legs
dodge
side step

so 3 tables only. I would leave roster slots alone and skills in their respective GASP categories, and leave skill access for players as they are now.

I would just say you can have 0-4 Killers, 0-6 Ballers, and 0-16 Standard players

you could still have killers with ClawPoMB , but they would be fewer in number and potentially you would need to build away from them to win games anyway. Killers don't have dodge access, only Ballers can side step... see what you think.

like I said it is just an idea.

Reason: ''
Image
Ikterus wrote: But for the record, play Voyagers_UK if you have the chance. He's cursed! :P
voyagers_uk
Da Cynic
Posts: 7462
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Location: Nice Red Uniforms and Fanatical devotion to the Pope!

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by voyagers_uk »

an regarding your comment about catchers and passers being obsolete, I would say that you now have a clearer path to them. in 2ed Dwarves could never have a catcher, they could catch just not have a specialist

this way the rosters stay as they are but Mnagers have a greater flexibility in what skills they choose to give players.

you could make them one of 3 ways assuming you didn't have that slot filled already.

Reason: ''
Image
Ikterus wrote: But for the record, play Voyagers_UK if you have the chance. He's cursed! :P
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by garion »

yeah its an interesting idea.

But I personally don't think it is required, Traits do the job I want them too really and getting rid of the stupid Pile On should make for more interesting team building, without everthing having to be focused around using one combo or beating it.

While i get what you are coming from most people build in that way anyway. Infact there is a thread going on on fumbbl this very second about this sort of team building-

4 cpomb or POMB
1 or 2 ball carriers
then the rest are blockers or just fodder.

and I don't think that change would move you away from it really. It would possibly just push people more in that direction and again push people more towards 4 stars the rest scrubs sort of teams.

but i dunno, its hard to say, with such a big change its really just guess work.

Reason: ''
gandresch
Experienced
Experienced
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by gandresch »

Hi,

I hate to say it but I dislike the whole idea of getting back to LRB4 and getting all the stuff that I really didn't like those days, putting it into a different file and calling it new. There are just too many things in the original document that I think are obsolete.

I agree that changes are sensible and that something must be done and I apologize for not reading all the posts before writing this.

gan

Reason: ''
voyagers_uk
Da Cynic
Posts: 7462
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Location: Nice Red Uniforms and Fanatical devotion to the Pope!

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by voyagers_uk »

ROFL :lol:

Reason: ''
Image
Ikterus wrote: But for the record, play Voyagers_UK if you have the chance. He's cursed! :P
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by garion »

gandresch wrote:Hi,

I hate to say it but I dislike the whole idea of getting back to LRB4 and getting all the stuff that I really didn't like those days, putting it into a different file and calling it new. There are just too many things in the original document that I think are obsolete.

I agree that changes are sensible and that something must be done and I apologize for not reading all the posts before writing this.
gan
Lol, well thats fine. But there is very little that is like LRB4 here, just traits really, which i guess is the only think you are refering to really. The rest is just the best bits from all the rulesets and some new stuff.

But you can never please everyone. For me LRB4 is still the closest the rules have ever been to perfect and it was a million miles away from it.

Reason: ''
zerodemon
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 9:59 pm

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by zerodemon »

These rules would make a great pack for a one-day or two-day event (though there are certainly some difficult rulings here, i.e. Juggernaut and Wild Animal) but would be incredibly hairy for home spun, longer leagues.

The reasoning for this is simple. In home leagues, coaches are much more laid back. Yes, they want to win, but they're happy to take risks with skill development to see what they can make. It's a different story for competition play.

Coaches want to power-game. Your pack limits that somewhat, and adds some interesting twists along the way. I have some thoughts.

I think traits were a good idea poorly executed. I'm sorry to say they seem just as poorly executed here. The alternative is skill development trees (which are too convoluted for BB.)
The Ogress (though fun) seems to be a piece of wishlisting, granting the Amazon team a Big Gal for the sake of having one. They were fine without it, though I do agree with the +1AV on Blitzers somewhat as a general change.

Overall good work though. If you're playing at home or with a gaming group, it often benefits everybody to vary up the kind of league you are playing, and throw in some random events to confuse matters. That usually provokes your gaming buddies in to making original choices. We do this using Dungeon- and Demolition-Bowls

Reason: ''
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by garion »

zerodemon wrote:These rules would make a great pack for a one-day or two-day event (though there are certainly some difficult rulings here, i.e. Juggernaut and Wild Animal) but would be incredibly hairy for home spun, longer leagues.


Coaches want to power-game. Your pack limits that somewhat, and adds some interesting twists along the way.
I'm not going down the zons route again, read the past few pages to understand but it is not for no reason.

I dont understand what you mean with Juggernaut and Wild Animal? Whats your point? :)

and yeah it limits power gaming. That is exactly the intention. It just shouldnt be so easy to do.

Reason: ''
dines
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 1:59 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by dines »

A few comments I missed in my last post:

- Good with the fouling, bank and kick off changes
- Interesting with the new skills and your jugger change is good now. Think the skill changes would work out fine
- Still don't like the trait idea
- p. 11 in the second box you write "removal of negatrait", third box is "nega-trait removal"
- I prefer Plasmoids wizard pricing, but good fun with the zap back
- I like the norse change, reduced prices of big guys, normal mutations on CD mino (then people might even consider taking him, hoping for a good mutation) and reduced rr prices on the difficult teams
- It would be really interesting to see how teams would develop with the new pricing of skills, my guess would be to the better
- What about spiralling expenses?

Reason: ''
FUMBBL nick: Metalsvinet
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Garions Rules Finished

Post by garion »

dines wrote:A few comments I missed in my last post:

- Good with the fouling, bank and kick off changes
- Interesting with the new skills and your jugger change is good now. Think the skill changes would work out fine
- Still don't like the trait idea
- p. 11 in the second box you write "removal of negatrait", third box is "nega-trait removal"
- I prefer Plasmoids wizard pricing, but good fun with the zap back
- I like the norse change, reduced prices of big guys, normal mutations on CD mino (then people might even consider taking him, hoping for a good mutation) and reduced rr prices on the difficult teams
- It would be really interesting to see how teams would develop with the new pricing of skills, my guess would be to the better
- What about spiralling expenses?
Thanks for the feedback, will sort out the typo sometime. Yeah wizard may be worth 200k, but i have stopped lightning being so effective for the elfy type teams by reverting it to the far more tactical and interesting version from lrb4 and before. So I'm not convinced the extra 50 k is worth it really. I will never understand how someone thought it okay to give you a 2+ hit anywhere on the pitch when the old zap was 4+, which was the hit anywhere on the pitch spell back then. But anyway, i think it will be okay now.

Spirraling expenses table was in there, but i removed it for now. But the idea was to start it off from 2000TV but have a steeper increase after a certain amount of increiments, the break even point is slightly higher, but after that the SE cost is far worse. I keep testing it on teams on fumbbl to see what their TV would be with the different skill costing system and how it would effect their SE cost and it seems to fit well. But I'm not 100% on that yet. I will need more time to make sure with that one.

As for traits, it is quite interesting how different environments view that really. when this was posted on fumbbl their was pretty much universal opproval of Traits returning from any coach that has a clue, with a few exceptions, people like Kodah who know the game and doesn't like them. But he loves the current rules which i really don't, so we obviously liked different things about the editions.

There was another thread on fumbbl just the other day, someone was asking what double they should take on their player, and everyone said Dodge. This is exactly why traits are great. It stops that unbelievably boring use of doubles for dodge only with the occasional Jump Up for their Pile On players. Anything to reduce the amount of blodge in the game is good and the traits do just that. In LRB4 I don't think I ever took dodge on a player on a double with one exception, a human blitzer that had Ag5, stand firm and tackle, already. This is because frenzy and a good version of stand firm is back which will be add more tactical variety to the game and you will see far far less of blanket blodge on every team.

Reason: ''
Post Reply