Talk Fantasy Football

I think the poll says it all.

If you think another option should be added, tell me and i'll see what i can do.

Great to see this poll up Zombie, I've thought about it quite often what ppl think of this rule, but never come to do the poll before I forgot it agian

Anyways, I think its a great rule. There are few enough Ints as it is, with the chance of fumble before the Ints would reduce this number even more. But I'll see what the others mean, seems to be more ppl that don't like it at the time of writing.

I think its a stupid rule! If some1 makes an interception (before its even been atempted to throw the ball) it should be made after the ball has been thrown! Whena person is trying to intercept a ball you should still have to roll to see if you fumble the ball or not. I mean how the hell can a player intercept a fumle when they are 6-7 squares away.
I still use the rules but i think they are really stupid.

agree with them above... makes no difference in game mechanics to have it in a more sequential order

Pass > Intercept (if not fumbled!) > Catch...

It's not exacly rocket science is it?

Althought the current rule - intercept before the pass - is there to try and get more interceptions, we have never used it.

In addition, I believe that most on-line leagues use the official rule not because they agree with it but because its official. This is certainly the case for RABBL.

Having said all this, to be honest the order doesn't really bother me any.


Dave

I agree with everything Dave just said...well except for the bit about the RABBL, since I have no idea about that.

It always poses a problem when explaining the game to newbie's: "Well OK, you're about to pass. You just have to roll for passing, but wait, this guy here is trying to intercept! You didn't get the ball away yet? No but in order to get more interceptions..." And then they always look at you in a way that forces you to explain that yes, you do realize how silly this rule is...

Micke

Hi all,
last season we tested this rule:

1) roll intercept after pass.
2) if the pass was inaccurate, then the intercept roll is only at -1, not -2.

We hoped that it would give more interceptions.
It didn't.
I can remember 3 distinct situations where my pass blocker had the open shot, just to watch the poor schmuck thrower fumble instead.

So - now were back to the official rules.
We want more interceptions, and the official rules help with that.

Martin

I'm not completely convinced about the main argument of the advocates of the official ruling. Namely that it gives more interceptions.

This is the same reason why making intercepting -1 or even +0 instead of -2 doesn't increase the amount of interceptions. The amount of interception attempts does not remain constant when rules change. Instead, as a response to easier interceptions, the possibilities to intercept become more rare.

If interceptions are made after the pass, the odds for the ball to be within the throwing teams influence (either succesfully passed, or lying beside the thrower after a fumble) increase. This causes more passes where you can intercept. It doesn't increase them much, but I believe the slightly smaller chance to intercept is offset by this affect so the amount of interceptions would stays approximately constant. Additionally the passing sequence makes a lot more sense.

Another fact not sure if anyone has thought of is inaccurate passes. Now the ball scatters 3 times to find out where the target square now is as the result of the inaccuracy. Now would you then reuse the range ruler from the thrower to the "new" target square. This is the actual flight path of the thrown ball and as a result it may travel over different players, giving them the chance to intercept instead of the previous route which they may not have been under.

Its a game mechanic, if you start thinking too logically you should have to do what i said above regarding intercepting inaccurate throws.

A bit of trivia:
My brother has a vampire team with an AG5 vampire.
He likes to pass from his far down his own backfield where he is safe.

On a 4+ he makes it.
On a 1-3 he fumbles (in which case the ball is safe).

Personally I like the extra chances to intercept.
If you intercept after the pass, then you lose half of your interception attempts.
But OK - it's a marginal example

Martin

I have to say I agree with this game mechanic. The pass is assumed to be sucessfully launched if the interception is good. Looking at this in a "realistic" way would reduce the number of possible interceptions by a small but perceptable amount. It's already very tough and takes many skills to make someone anywhere close to being a threat. This is as it should be.

If you want it changed to a pass>intercept>catch order, I'd suggest that there ought to be a catch modifier if there is someone attempting to intercept. This would be in addition to TZ modifiers. This would reflect the interceptor getting a finger on the ball, obstructing vision, or hurrying him. Hey, YOU want it realistic, right? When you look at it this way, I think the way it's written is pretty good.

Grumbledook wrote:Another fact not sure if anyone has thought of is inaccurate passes. Now the ball scatters 3 times to find out where the target square now is as the result of the inaccuracy. Now would you then reuse the range ruler from the thrower to the "new" target square. This is the actual flight path of the thrown ball and as a result it may travel over different players, giving them the chance to intercept instead of the previous route which they may not have been under.

Its a game mechanic, if you start thinking too logically you should have to do what i said above regarding intercepting inaccurate throws.

I thought about bringing this up too but thought I wouldn't. I don't think this is a very good idea anyway because you don't know why the pass is inaccruate or where it went off target. Did the Thrower not account for the wind, throw it too close to someone's helmet...ad infinitum? All of these can be reflected in the thrower's roll since you can easily be argued it was his bad judgement.

Well, then in this case...what happens with the Safe Throw rule? Say, under these Intercept BEFORE Pass rules, what happens if the defender successfully intercepts and the thrower rolls a successful Safe Throw roll...but then rolls a 1 on the subsequent pass? Should Safe Throw = FUMBLE?!?

Uhhhhhhh...

Nope...it should definately remain Pass -> Int -> Catch

Also, a comment to the "We Want More Interceptions" folks...

The way I play the game, I never even give my opponent the chance to intercept, barring the surprise "Haha-that-guy-has-Pass-Block" play, and thus far I have never been intercepted, with a thrower who has over 30 completions. However, with 2 Gutter Runners with Pass Block, I've surprisingly made 3 interceptions in our current league.

Apart from the coaches who play to not allow interceptions, and the [guesstimate] 66% [/guesstimate] of the teams in Blood Bowl that have a non-existent passing game, I think that the INT rules should remain Pass -> Int -> Catch. Maybe...MAYBE...make an INT +0 on an accurate pass...and MAYBE giving an extra SPP or two to make them feel a little more special....

But like Mestari noted, the better the chances of making an Interception, the lesser the likelihhood that a coach will allow the defense the opportunity to intercept...

Thus, quoting some smart dude....

"If it ain't broke, don't F**K with it!"

Grumbledook wrote:Another fact not sure if anyone has thought of is inaccurate passes. Now the ball scatters 3 times to find out where the target square now is as the result of the inaccuracy. Now would you then reuse the range ruler from the thrower to the "new" target square. This is the actual flight path of the thrown ball and as a result it may travel over different players, giving them the chance to intercept instead of the previous route which they may not have been under.

Its a game mechanic, if you start thinking too logically you should have to do what i said above regarding intercepting inaccurate throws.

Over here, we used to play that you figured out the new path for intercepts. Only used that rule for about a year. Now we just say that the reason it flew a bit off is maybe <i>because</i> it was tipped off by the player trying to intercept. It makes the game easier to play and makes just as much sense.

plasmoid wrote:A bit of trivia:
My brother has a vampire team with an AG5 vampire.
He likes to pass from his far down his own backfield where he is safe.

On a 4+ he makes it.
On a 1-3 he fumbles (in which case the ball is safe).

Personally I like the extra chances to intercept.
If you intercept after the pass, then you lose half of your interception attempts. :smoking:
But OK - it's a marginal example :D

Martin :)

That's pretty silly, a player who never, ever throws an innaccurate pass. That's why we only count a natural 1 for fumbles, modifed by tackle zones but not the range. There's no reason why you should fumble more often when you throw further. You should become more inaccurate, not fumble more often.