New EXP/Ageing Rule

[GalakStarscraper]

Blood Bowl Magazine #5 eh? lol Well gee. Seeing as how that was in July and I have yet to see #3 yet I'll hold my excitement back for awhile.

Some folks are never happen even when they get listened too ... and Pariah I like you mate ... I just think if the roles where reversed (you were on the BBRC) you'd find your own posts a tad impatient .... especially since I can link about 20 requests by you on this board for printed rule material to slow down significantly.

Galak

[Ghost of Pariah]

I don't want printed rule material to slow down. I want the rule makers to slow down and look at what they made before they change the big stuff.
I'd be happy as hell to hear that I could get any Blood Bowl material in my area. I'd be happy as hell to hear that the BBRC wondered what my opinions were on Dwarf Runesmiths. I'd love to hear that the BBRC was taking Secret Weapons seriously.
I'd love to hear that the BBRC didn't want to overhaul the entire system already.

[Darkson]

I'd like to present this rule to my club next season. Is there anywhere I can find a copy to print?

[GalakStarscraper]

I'd like to present this rule to my club next season. Is there anywhere I can find a copy to print?

The Lustrian Premiere League is using these rules so here the write-up from their league site ... I revised them slightly to match what was agreed on per this site.

http://www.redpenpr.com/filestore/files/lpl_home.html to see their version they are using without Galak's editing to turn it back to the agreed upon rules.

Experience Points
The post-game MVP's and aging system from the Bloodbowl Living Rulebook 1.3 are not being used for this league. Instead, players will gain experience for the match and aging is handled through this system instead.

An experience point is worth 1spp, and the number of experience points a player has gained should be tracked on the team's roster in the column which previously recorded MVPs. After every match which the player participates (a participating player is any who COULD have played at any point in the match) rolls a d6. If the result of the roll is greater than the number of experience points the player currently has, then the player gains 1 experience point. A roll of '1' always fails and a roll of '6' always succeeds.

When a player has gained 6 or more experience points, he is subject to aging. Anytime a player with 6 or more experience points rolls a '1' on his experience point roll after the game, he might have lost a step and must roll 2d6 on the following table to see the effect.

Code: Select all

Roll    Effect 
2       ST -1 and Miss Next Game 
3       AG -1 and Miss Next Game 
4       MA -1 and Miss Next Game 
5       AV -1 and Miss Next Game 
6       Niggle and Miss Next Game 
7       Miss Next Game 
8-12  No Effect 

Galak

[Marcus]

There's support for introducing this to the next ECBBL season. Time for new teams. Time to wheel out the SIN once more.

[plasmoid]

Hi all,
I personally really hated the ageing system.
I like the EXP system a lot better.

Still, just like ageing, luck can still be a big factor in this, meaning that some will get off lightly, while others will get burned. (Though I do recognize that the burn will kick in later, which will be much much better).

How do you like this idea for evening things out a little more:
when you age, roll 2d6:
2-6: Age. Choose 1 permanent injury (MA, ST, AG, AV, Niggling).
7+: No effect

Martin

[Grumbledook]

that woudl defeat the point in aging if you can choose the stat that will affect your players the least

[Krinosy]

I like the 'luck' involved selection of injury for aged players, as it matches the 'luck' that occurs elsewhere in the game, most notably in skills and injuries. As Grumble says, allowing the player to choose the stat reduction with the minimal effect on the player pretty much negates the effects of it.

Though as an aside I'd personally prefer to see the 'worse' results at the upper ranges of the 2D6 (i.e. the 8-12 range) to match the aforementioned injuries and skill selection tables.

[Grumbledook]

Its considered that low rolls are bad high rolls are good, normal inj rolls are made by your opponent so they want high rolls to hurt your players and gain themselves spp. For aging rolls your doing them yourself so you want to roll high also but to keep your players safe.

[plasmoid]

Hi all,
as stated, my only problem with the EXP system is the luck factor. Sure, it is a lot less present than with ageing, but still, some will get off lightly, and some will be more seriously burned.

And I don't consider the fact that this is a luck game any kind of reason that we should pile more luck into it.

So, I suggested that the player pick his own "injury if he aged".

To this Grumbledook said:
>that woudl defeat the point in aging if you can choose the stat that will
>affect your players the least

Not necessarily.
If you at the same time increased the chance of injury to, say, automatic, then you would have more "injuries" but with less impact, meaning that it would be a slow deterioration process, rather than the occasional cardiac arrest.

So - my idea:
If you have 6 EXP and you roll a 1 then you age.
Don't roll 2d6. Don't look at a table. Sorry - you age.
But at least you get to pick the ageing effect (MA, ST, AG, AV, Nigg.)

Martin

[Heiper]

I don't want printed rule material to slow down. I want the rule makers to slow down and look at what they made before they change the big stuff.
I'd be happy as hell to hear that I could get any Blood Bowl material in my area. I'd be happy as hell to hear that the BBRC wondered what my opinions were on Dwarf Runesmiths. I'd love to hear that the BBRC was taking Secret Weapons seriously.
I'd love to hear that the BBRC didn't want to overhaul the entire system already.

I agree with you on what you've said the last pages ( I took time to read all 9 pages again ). Age is good enough at this point, take a year or two to playtest something that "works" (I actually are with Zombie on the App. Fees, worked wonders in my league, tho i know it won't come back) I really want what Pariah has said more than new age rules at this time, and like Pariah i've waited a long time for it to come, and almost no news on how its going (good that something will come in BBM5 tho, at last).

[SgtCaples]

In general I like this system, certainly better than the one in place now.

I do however think the penalties of age are way too harsh.

losing 1 point in a stat is very bad, missing a game in addition is really too much. Since your team will be ageing at a relatively even pace, you will get to a point where you are almost always down a guy and beyond that you could easily get to a place where you are down several just from this process. I faked progression and after a certain number of games, all of a suudden I was missing 5 guys for my next game.

I also don't think it jives with the fluff in that way. If it is the case that a player is developing a "bad kneee" or something, then that's fine and having niggling on there is great but right now it is essentially giving them an instant injury. It doesn't seem progressive.

I was behind this idea when I read about it some weeks ago but now I am not too sure. I reccomend that a poll be put up before any decisions are made.

[martynq]

Since your team will be ageing at a relatively even pace, you will get to a point where you are almost always down a guy and beyond that you could easily get to a place where you are down several just from this process. I faked progression and after a certain number of games, all of a suudden I was missing 5 guys for my next game.

I reccomend that a poll be put up before any decisions are made.

Actually, there are several leagues that are now testing this system which is better than taking a poll anyway. It is the possibility that all your players age at about the same rate that concerns me. My team for Galak's MBBL now has about four or five players with 5 EXPs, so I guess one or two of these might well have 6 EXPs after the next match. We'll just have to see what happens by the end of the season and whether teams are becoming unplayable due to these aging effects.

Cheers,
Martyn

[Icedman]

hey all,
I wasn't going to post on the end of this novel, but after reading the last couple of posts, I just couldn't help it.

A lot of people don't like the current aging system, for a variety of reasons; its tied to the skill progression, if you fail the roll then you at least get a NI, etc, etc.

Quite a few people don't like (or at least aren't sure about) the proposed EXP system; let the current system run its course, bad luck after 1 game can see a number of your players "age" at once, etc, etc.

While I was at work yesterday, I had this idea: why not use the current method of determining when to roll for "aging", but use the EXP table to determine the aging effect.

2 - 5: Lose stat and MNG
6: NI and MNG
7: MNG
8 - 12: No Effect

This setup means that aging in its current form doesn't automatically mean that your star player is suddenly up the creek, but it still keeps pretty much the entire current system in the works, which means that coaches don't have to learn yet another system in a couple years that throws confusion into the mix. Also, it fits a little better with the Rules Review and the concept of tweaking the rules set before just throwing it out.

[SgtCaples]

Fundamentally, I like your idea but it is the ageing table that I actually have an issue with. It is the miss next game threat (which is very liekely on that table) that bothers me.
I think that a stat decrease is brutal enough without missing a game on top of that and statistically, when you make those rolls, you will be missing games.
It is also very liekely that your better players will be missing games sooner, and that by your 20th game, you will be in a position to see your team evaporate en-mass after a game.