Talk Fantasy Football

There used to be a Vault... (any Sinatra fans in here ? No ? Ok)

amid all the talk of the new box, taking back BB, what the hell is the NAF doing/not doing, I find myself longing for the days of the Vault : it was a great forum experience that led to huge improvements in the rulebook (how long ago was it ? I cant seem to remember).
There's no more BBRC-right-but it doesnt mean we cant think aloud and come up with suggestions.
This forum is still a premium ressource for anything BB related, I guess there's a chance that people in charge of the new box at least have a look at our ideas.
Optimistic ? I accept the insult.
So, what if we collect our ideas to improve on CRP and what if we open a sub-forum to discuss them ?
Im not thinking about Tyrannid rosters obviously, more about tweaking the current ruleset.

I'd love for the 2-square endzone to make a comeback.

this line from the House rules sub I could get behind for example

but my personnal crusade would be getting rid of the mandatory catch rule, just because it ruined so many well-thought blitzes on turn 16 !
whaddyathink ?

THE PEOPLE WANT A VAULT AND THEY WANT IT NOW !

It'll be like this:
The majority of people is okay with CRP rules, therefore, they will not say anything.
The minority of people will start shouting out their ideas.
So, if anyone of importance will have a look, they'll only see complaints, complaints, complaints.

Blizzard did this for a while, listening to all whiners in the forums, simply forgetting that most people don't even visit the forums, let alone write about being allright with everything.

House rules should stay exactly that: house rules.

You seem way too optimistic for maybe some people on these forums nowadays
I like that!

May I chip something in I have heard just today:

Remove "Loner" from Star Players and make them more fun!

+1 Khar-peth. . .

If Regash disagrees, you must be on the right track

Regash is spot on.

I will also add that there will be a lot of people calling for action but once real work needs to be done, most will fall silent and all the work will end up sitting with a small group.

A noisy crowd calling for change becomes a small silent rabble once volunteers are needed.

Regash wrote: House rules should stay exactly that: house rules.

to me, house rules are more those wacky ideas you come up with when inebriated, that you use with your friends/at your local gaming club and such (like the Chaos rules from ARBBL).
House rules can modify the balance of the game or change the overall mechanics drastically.
Im not suggesting this, Im more about perfecting the CRP. You say the majority is okay with CRP and Im too but can it be bettered ? It sure can.
I dont know if you were around when the Vault "happened" (its a shame those posts arent here anymore btw) but it was quite fruitful for the game.
GW being listening or not isnt exactly the point, if we cant get to discuss and/or organize the changes we want for the rules then we cant complain at all if Grandma Wendy delivers crap new rules.

gregory_n_white wrote:once real work needs to be done, most will fall silent and all the work will end up sitting with a small group

We're only talking about discussing rules, some polls and maybe some kind of compilation to summarize the proposals, doesnt seem like hard work to me. If it only attracts a minority and falls into oblivion, whats the problem ?
But there's no reason we shouldnt try a new Vault.


So, Im asking the mods on here : can we please get a sub-forum Vault to let optimists fools do their (vain and useless) thing ?

Im more about perfecting the CRP

That'd be entirely in the eye of the beholder.

Khar-peth wrote:So, Im asking the mods on here : can we please get a sub-forum Vault to let optimists fools do their (vain and useless) thing ?

Would that not be House Rules by another name?

lunchmoney wrote:Would that not be House Rules by another name?

I absolutely agree to this.

Since there is no BBRC, we don't need no Vault.
And I really doubt that GW is really reading TFF.

Khar-peth wrote:to me, house rules are more those wacky ideas you come up with when inebriated, that you use with your friends/at your local gaming club and such (like the Chaos rules from ARBBL).
House rules can modify the balance of the game or change the overall mechanics drastically.
Im not suggesting this, Im more about perfecting the CRP. You say the majority is okay with CRP and Im too but can it be bettered ? It sure can.

Plasmoid... is that you under that mask? All this says to me is that you think your personal ideas are too good to be considered "house rules" and instead should be considered "release candidates" for official fanfare and inclusion by GW. No doubt in their heart everyone imagines their house rules are better than other people's. Doesn't mean they're not house rules.

We've got a forum for those.

If there ever is another BBRC then it'll be up to them to decide how they make their decisions, and if they ever call for discussion then no doubt TFF would give them all the space they needed. They'd be insane to say "just.. tell us whatever rules you imagine should be included or changed in this forum", and would be best off picking stuff from their own thoughts or other house rules forums and posting the ones they were interested in seeing a discussion of, making it a RFC forum not an "open season on logic" forum as house rules forums tend to be.

Khar-peth wrote:THE PEOPLE WANT A VAULT AND THEY WANT IT NOW !

Unless "the people" is a nickname you use for yourself, you should stick to speaking for yourself. You certainly don't speak for me.

Wow, I expected some negativity but you guys really went for it.

dode74 wrote:

Im more about perfecting the CRP

That'd be entirely in the eye of the beholder.

Sure thing.
I hear some people still play 2nd edition cause they dont like turnovers, imo the current ruleset is infinitely better. To each their own.
That certainly shouldnt stop us from discussing rules on a forum.

Regash wrote: And I really doubt that GW is really reading TFF.

You doubt it, fair enough, I do too.
Then again, why should it prevent discussion on a forum ?

VoodooMike wrote:All this says to me is that you think your personal ideas are too good to be considered "house rules" and instead should be considered "release candidates" for official fanfare and inclusion by GW. No doubt in their heart everyone imagines their house rules are better than other people's. Doesn't mean they're not house rules.

[/quote]
well, I obviously think some ideas (not mine) are "release candidates", but my aim wasnt to push them blindly, I wanted to gather ideas from like-minded people on the forum and to get feedback. Thanks to you I realize now what a stupid idea it was.

VoodooMike wrote: Unless "the people" is a nickname you use for yourself, you should stick to speaking for yourself. You certainly don't speak for me.

This is the best part ; talk about taking yourself seriously !
So, to clarify, Im in no way trying to speak for the community and certainly not in the name of VoodooMike, I was only trying to stir discussion on a forum. Silly me.

Sure thing.
I hear some people still play 2nd edition cause they dont like turnovers, imo the current ruleset is infinitely better. To each their own.
That certainly shouldnt stop us from discussing rules on a forum.

Of course not. And there is a perfectly good House Rules forum ("Got some ideas for rules? Maybe a skill change or something completely different!!! Tell us here."), which is right next to a perfectly good New Concepts forum ("Got a great idea and/or proposal for BloodBowl?") in which you can do so. What's the problem with either of those?

I wanted to gather ideas from like-minded people

So, people who agree with you?

Khar-peth wrote:

lunchmoney wrote: And I really doubt that GW is really reading TFF.

You doubt it, fair enough, I do too.

I didnt say that. Be careful with your nested quotes.

My only comment was what you are looking for is basically the House Rules sub forum that already exists.

I'm fine with CRP as it is.

I am a rebeld.

lunchmoney wrote:

Khar-peth wrote:

lunchmoney wrote: And I really doubt that GW is really reading TFF.

You doubt it, fair enough, I do too.

I didnt say that. Be careful with your nested quotes.

My only comment was what you are looking for is basically the House Rules sub forum that already exists.

Corrected.
There's a whole sub-forum for Elfball thats been untouched for years, I thought a new sub-forum dedicated to the new edition/box relaunch/whatever of BB could have made sense (this is no dig at Galak btw).

dode74 wrote:So, people who agree with you?

people with knowledge of the game, sharing enthusiasm about future BB products.
Surprisingly, I have no hidden agenda !
Anyway you have a history of argueing pointlessly rather than discussing sensibly so I dont care much about what you think.