The real issue with the Khorne roster...

For Fantasy Football related chat that doesn't come under any of other forum categories.

Moderator: TFF Mods

Post Reply
User avatar
Indigo
Not Grumpy in the slightest
Posts: 4250
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 12:38 pm
Location: Circa 1985

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Indigo »

spubbbba wrote:GW are very protective of their IP so I don’t believe for 1 second the Khorne team wasn’t released with their full approval. Cyanide have claimed in their Dungeonbowl forum that they can’t change any skills, costs or rules for the deathroller since GW won’t let them. That is why they are stuck with the horrible rules mess based on previous obsolete editions.

Making comparisons with other computer games is little help as they were not direct adaptations of existing games. Bloodbowl was the 1st to do this in years, the last was probably warhammer quest (maybe space hulk).
It doesn't have to be a literal, direct adaptation of game, even ignoring the fact that taking the game from one medium and transferring it to another will by necessity require fundamental changes to how things work.

Did you see the shitstorm that went down with dawn of war? The point is, GW approve 3rd parties to use their IP, probably sit on design committees, probably sign off on releases. But history shows that they do not always exercise the diligence they need to at all times. Or are happy to let OTHERS add stuff to their interpretations but not deem it good enough to add to their own games.

When it bothers them enough, they change it. Dawn of War.
When they don't care, they ignore it. Vengeance Launcher, Space Marine (THQ)
When it's well received and they see profit, they take it. Fire Warrior Rail Rifle.

Otherwise, the revenue from the license will be what makes the headlines in management circles.

And again... "full approval" for a 3rd party to add something into their rendition of the licence does not mean GW adopt that as canon/fluff/rules change to their OWN rendition of their IP. FFS I need to use a larger font.

Reason: ''
User avatar
Joemanji
Power Gamer
Posts: 9508
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 3:08 pm
Location: ECBBL, London, England

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Joemanji »

Indigo wrote:And again... "full approval" for a 3rd party to add something into their rendition of the licence does not mean GW adopt that as canon/fluff/rules change to their OWN rendition of their IP.
Amen.

The Khorne roster is currently no different from all Wood Elf linemen starting with 'Guard' in the BB card game.

Reason: ''
*This post may have been made without the use of a hat.
Bucket-Head
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Malaga (Spain)

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Bucket-Head »

The Card game has different game-mechanics. The Online game has the same game-mechanics, so it is a throny issue.

Reason: ''
Rock N Block!!!
dode74
Ex-Cyanide/Focus toadie
Posts: 2565
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:55 pm
Location: Near Reading, UK

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by dode74 »

Are there not additional house rules for buying Armour upgrades and the like? Has anyone suggested we use those?
You mean like the Magic Items on page 57? ;)

Reason: ''
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by plasmoid »

Hi Indigo,
I fully agree that GW 'secretly' approving the roster for the computer game gives the NAF and everyone else no reason to raise the team to official status.
By all means it should remain a house rule roster - though probably a house rule roster that will be Fairly common.

I do think that if GW ever decides to make the team properly official, they are very likely to go with the current one. And if they do, I really don't see any reason for the NAF to disown it at that point. GW still owns the game, and for the old boys to outlaw something that all the newcomers will find in their rulebook will cause the very rift in the community that apparently is a Big worry for some.

They've already given us the completely misplaces B-movie team (Necro)
So be it.

Cheers
Martin

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
User avatar
Maverick
Legend
Legend
Posts: 1935
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 7:05 pm
Location: uk

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Maverick »

Assuming the post above - that i was about to suggest was meant to be a pm - was indeed meant as such will treat it as a missent email ;-)

Reason: ''
"Even if you win the Rat Race you're still a RAT"

Image
SillySod
Eternal Rookie
Eternal Rookie
Posts: 1952
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:09 am
Location: Winchester

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by SillySod »

Purplegoo wrote:If Cyanide (as an example) release four new rosters to shift units over the next two years (say) including Khorne, and some process that is set up accepts two and rejects two on the basis of roster strength or a change in rules, that’s all well and good for the NAF. FUMBBL might accept three and reject one, say. Cyanide would clearly have all four. Johnny Blogg’s TT league might have none, since they’ve never heard of BB on the internet or hate Cyanide, or whatever, Jane Blogg’s league all four because ‘GW say so, and who are the NAF to decide for me?’, and several shades of grey over 100 leagues in between. Suddenly, no-one knows what the rules to Blood Bowl are any more.
That is a fair argument but try turning it on its head.

Suppose I am a Cyanide player and I want to take part in tabletop. As things stand I would be surprised to discover that people were using random house ruled rosters called "Slann" and "Pact"... lolwhut? However, it turns out that these jokers have also decided to ban the Khorne roster. Not Amazons or some jerkass annoying roster... Khorne... riiiight. Honestly, if I were new to the hobby I think I would find this somewhat hard to appreciate given that the Khorne roster is clearly more official (it isn't actually official but it is has been approved for publishing, unlike Slann).

I think that, should we turn down the Khorne roster, we will have already entered rules fracture territory. If we accept it then we might be able to evade that possibility.
Joemanji wrote:But as Indy says, that isn't even the issue. Cyanide is not a BB port, it is a BB computer game that happens to very closely resemble the core rules we use on TT. Are there not additional house rules for buying Armour upgrades and the like? Has anyone suggested we use those? Or used their variations of certain skills that are buggy or too difficult to program? No. Cyanide is a separate entity.
Ummm... no?

Prior to the Khorne roster all(?) Cyanide house rules were optional and not actually accepted in their competitive leagues. It is certainly the case for the majority of games played - Dode can probably clarify the situation as things stand today. Besides, GW and Cyanide have consistently expressed the opinion that their game emulates tabletop BB. Hence the argument that "Cyanide is a totally different game" seems a little thin.

Remember when TBB members used to hate on FUMBBL and MBBL by pretending that it wasn't "real" BB? It feels like you are treading the same path.
Pakulkan wrote:To date, Khorne inclusion in a PC game is not directly offical. Agree.
Just to make it very clear - this is where I am coming from as well.

Reason: ''
Victim of the Colonel's car boot smash. First person to use Glynn's bath.
Update: the Hartlepool family Glynn now has a virgin bath.

Barney is a clever dog.
User avatar
Indigo
Not Grumpy in the slightest
Posts: 4250
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 12:38 pm
Location: Circa 1985

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Indigo »

plasmoid wrote: I do think that if GW ever decides to make the team properly official, they are very likely to go with the current one. And if they do, I really don't see any reason for the NAF to disown it at that point. GW still owns the game, and for the old boys to outlaw something that all the newcomers will find in their rulebook will cause the very rift in the community that apparently is a Big worry for some.
Your point was fine until you said that. You've been listening to porritt too much, there's no "old boy" conspiracy, there's no coven of deviants bowing to "Lord Lycos's" every depraved wish.
(Yes there is. This has nothing to do with Blood Bowl or any conspiracy theories though. That's just how El Presidente rolls. - Admin)
There is no ulterior motive behind the NAF council! You sound like you've been listening to the people on TFF too long mate ;)

The NAF have said very, very little on this - nothing officially beyond "please wait it's being discussed". We didn't elect a team of megalomaniacs, we elected guys who are being extremely careful and thoughtful about this issue! It's the correct thing to do. If the NAF jumped to conclusions every time something new came out led by Cyanide we'd be using 16 teams, then 20-odd, dropped slann, removed the +1 to most agility rolls etc.

You see my point, Cyanide are not gospel, so the NAF are being patient. Too many clowns (which I don't count you as btw) on TFF just jump to ridiculous conclusions and create a storm in a teacup :)
They've already given us the completely misplaces B-movie team (Necro)
Maybe so, but consider that back then there were fewer teams than there are now, BB was still in it's adolescence (compared to today) and Necro have found a niche. Undead powergamers sometimes feel the need to take a different team ;) But in all seriousness, Necro were added by GW not some 3rd party. And they are an homage to Jervis's Dad who appeared in B-movie horror films so I'm prepared to forgive the team for the indulgence of the game's creator.

Reason: ''
User avatar
GalakStarscraper
Godfather of Blood Bowl
Posts: 15882
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Indiana, USA
Contact:

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by GalakStarscraper »

Geggster wrote:Just finally, I cannot imagine that given past experiences, Galak wanted to work too closely with GW.
Just to be clear ... I have no issues "helping" GW if it is for the better good of the game.
Perhaps GW started proceedings, and Tom was working at sufficient distance from them to be happy with his involvement, before GW swept in with a final stamp. But were I a betting man, I would have imagined that Tom would have checked very carefully first about who he was giving his time to voluntarily. And you can all make up your minds as to how much GW help Tom would have said was acceptable.
For the record ... even with how it ended ... I'd do the entire Vault process again. Did it suck ... yeah ... but it wasn't about me it was about the game.

Same thing here. I was shown a roster ... had a similar reaction to it that I did to Jervis's first email on what he wanted to turn BB into at the start of the Vault and knew I had to at least try to make it better. I know for a fact that the original roster we were given was 10x worse for fluff for Khorne than what we ended up with. Is it perfect ... no ... lots of handcuffs were involved so we had to work around them. Is it better than what it would have been ... oh yeah.

I got involved because it was for the good of the game. GW having a major role in this roster didn't effect me at all. I don't hold grudges ... not my nature. And this wasn't about helping GW ... it was about making sure the game doesn't suffer the same problems of GW's "make the roster really good when added so that folks buy the minis" effect. Did I think there would be minis right now ... oh yeah I did ... I'm actually puzzled that you don't have them out to purchase right now.

So for the record ... GW was majorly involved in this project ... if they were willing not to care ... I was willing not to care either. (remember they were the ones that sent me a written legal letter saying they'd never work with me again ... I never posted a comment like that in reverse to them at any point during the whole mess).

As for not holding grudges .... I hope to have an announcment of my own by October 15th along the same lines ... but that is a different thread.

Tom

Reason: ''
Impact! - Fantasy Football miniatures and supplies designed by gamers for gamers
Image
dode74
Ex-Cyanide/Focus toadie
Posts: 2565
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:55 pm
Location: Near Reading, UK

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by dode74 »

Prior to the Khorne roster all(?) Cyanide house rules were optional and not actually accepted in their competitive leagues. It is certainly the case for the majority of games played - Dode can probably clarify the situation as things stand today.
Few private leagues that I know of use "blitz" mode, which adds those house rules. The main difference rules-wise is the lack of star players.

Reason: ''
Geggster
Eurobowl Superstar
Posts: 684
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Location: ECBBL, London

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Geggster »

Tom - understood. I know how you felt before, but I'm sure the spectre of a totally unbalanced crazy team would have been enough for anyone to stop and give some reflection as to what might make it better. And you are well-placed to provide that insight, despite, I'm sure, some deep misgivings.

Good job I'm not a betting man - might have lost some money there!

Reason: ''
Geggster

Before you criticise someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when they find out, you're a mile away...... and you have their shoes.
User avatar
Indigo
Not Grumpy in the slightest
Posts: 4250
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 12:38 pm
Location: Circa 1985

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Indigo »

SillySod wrote:That is a fair argument but try turning it on its head.
There are many problems with your turning the argument on it's head.
Suppose I am a Cyanide player and I want to take part in tabletop. As things stand I would be surprised to discover that people were using random house ruled rosters called "Slann" and "Pact"... lolwhut?
a) the NAF doesn't support or pander to the Cyanide playerbase. That might sound harsh, but it's setup to support the GW playerbase, and the lolwhutting Cyanide player would quickly be educated in and realise the difference. If they then ragequit NAF because of the lack of Khorne it's arguable they probably weren't too mature anyway.

b) I'd argue that anyone playing BB exclusively online who somehow has missed this nonsense would very quickly be appraised of both sides of the discussion and can make their decision to continue tabletop, or go back to Cyanide only. But I seriously think the lack of one single roster for someone who has already decided they want to play tabletop is NOT going to change their mind.
However, it turns out that these jokers have also decided to ban the Khorne roster. Not Amazons or some jerkass annoying roster... Khorne... riiiight.
a) by having a weak argument, you've introduced the "jerkass Amazon"s as a strawman argument in the vain hope that poking fun the unpopular kid will give you more credence. Fail.
Honestly, if I were new to the hobby I think I would find this somewhat hard to appreciate given that the Khorne roster is clearly more official (it isn't actually official but it is has been approved for publishing, unlike Slann).
I love that. It's clearly more official but not actually official. And if you hark back to the last few posts of me trying to reiterate the idea that Cyanide official does not mean GW official, maybe you might spot that it's anything BUT clearly official.
I think that, should we turn down the Khorne roster, we will have already entered rules fracture territory. If we accept it then we might be able to evade that possibility.
If GW publish an official ruleset replacing LRB6 and include Khorne and the NAF decide NOT to take it on then (and so far, only then) I'll agree. Otherwise your arguments are fatally flawed.
Prior to the Khorne roster all(?) Cyanide house rules were optional and not actually accepted in their competitive leagues. It is certainly the case for the majority of games played - Dode can probably clarify the situation as things stand today. Besides, GW and Cyanide have consistently expressed the opinion that their game emulates tabletop BB.
Please link to GW's statement that it emulates tabletop but while you're doing that, look up the definition of emulation.
Hence the argument that "Cyanide is a totally different game" seems a little thin.
That's not the argument. It's Cyanide and their interpretation of GW's IP vs GW's official stated position on the matter. You're putting words in our mouths by implying we've said it's a totally different game, pls don't.
Remember when TBB members used to hate on FUMBBL and MBBL by pretending that it wasn't "real" BB? It feels like you are treading the same path.
Dodgy extrapolation that, comparing the alleged hatred to the debate over a roster? Doesn't tally up, it's apples and oranges. And come to that, I've been around here as long as anyone else and don't remember any outright hatred?

I'm not a fan of FUMBBL personally but certainly don't hate it and what it does for the community at large has been of great value. To a much (much) lesser extent I think Cyanide has done something similar, attracting a small number of people who weren't already involved with BB to the hobby. That's all good. But let's not forget the order of precedence here, and who in fact has "fractured the community". FUMBBL has tried pioneering it's own stuff, stunty leagues, all skink teams, tons more over the years but is content to keep them within it's own community. It lives alongside NAF, the two have reached a shared place where they are different ways of doing the same thing and EVERYONE benefits. Cyanide came along, maybe stole a few thousand (tens?) of FUMBBL players but again we were at least playing the same game. Now it's trying to change things but without realising it's not the driving force in the community. GW is. So it all comes full Farming circle and we realise until GW say so, it's not legit.
Just to make it very clear - this is where I am coming from as well.
Now you've totally Farming confused me :D

Reason: ''
User avatar
Darkson
Da Spammer
Posts: 24047
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: The frozen ruins of Felstad
Contact:

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Darkson »

So now we have it from one involved in the roster (that the other didn't disagree with) that GW were heavily involved in it, and (at least) planned figures, do we expect "CRP2"?

Reason: ''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
User avatar
Indigo
Not Grumpy in the slightest
Posts: 4250
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 12:38 pm
Location: Circa 1985

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Indigo »

Has this forum seriously sunk to the level where we're now being censored for using fruity language?

Small part of me just died. Why do I bother coming here.

Reason: ''
User avatar
Darkson
Da Spammer
Posts: 24047
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: The frozen ruins of Felstad
Contact:

Re: The real issue with the Khorne roster...

Post by Darkson »

Censor has been there from before I became a mod, so (at least) 5 years.

Reason: ''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
Post Reply