Vampire/Bloodlust queries

[Grumbledook]

you bite the thrall and then get your touchdown

so you played it right

[soulreaper]

you bite the thrall and then get your touchdown

so you played it right

AHH! Nice thank you very much!

[bjorn9486]

My league just started a new... league using the LB5+/LB6 rules and one player started a Vampire team and we were wondering a couple things specifically to do with Bloodlust.

1. If the Vampire Fails his BL roll, does he move to the nearest Thrall or does he just have to end his movement to bite a Thrall?

2. If he starts in a Tackle Zone or moves through a tackle zone, does he have to roll to dodge out/through?

3. Once he gets to the Thrall and bites him, can he continue to move?

4. A more specific one; If the player declares a block action with his Vampire, fails the BL roll and moves to bite a Thrall, can he then turn his block action into a blitz action? We assumed no when it happened, but it was a possibility so I wanted to ask it here.

Thank you

[Grumbledook]

1 You can do a normal move action you just have to end next to ANY of your own thralls (prone, stunned or standing) in order to bite one, it doesn't have to be the nearest one

2 It is still a normal move action and any normal rolls ie dodges etc still have to be done using the normal rules, so if you fail the dodge you don't end up standing next to a thrall, so it is a turnover and the vamp leaves the pitch

3 You bite the thrall after the move action so no you can't keep moving affterwards as the action has ended

4 Bloodlust requires you make a move action, not a blitz, so no you can't do that.

Though you say you are using the experimental rules, this changes it a bit as the rules have changed. The above is correct for LRB5

I'd have to go reread the experimental rules to clarify those.

[halinn]

In the experimental rules, you can carry out the action, so you don't lose the blitz as long as you can end up biting a thrall too. You can change a block to a move, but not to anything else. The action ends after the thrall is bitten, so you have to stop the action next to a thrall.

[GalakStarscraper]

With the new experimental rules

3) Biting the Thrall is done at the very very end of everything (which is why you can Gaze first). So once you bite ... you cannot do anything else.

4) You can only turn a Block Action into a Move Action ... not into a Blitz Action.

Galak

[SBG]

OK, help me out here. This is taken from the latest LRB, the one that we're experimenting on this year:

Vampires must occasionally feed on the blood of the living. Immediately
after declaring an Action with a Vampire, roll a d6: On a 2+ the Vampire
can carry out the Action as normal. On a 1, however, the Vampire must
feed on a Thrall team-mate or a spectator. The Vampire may continue
with his declared Action or if he had declared a Block Action, he may
take a Move Action instead. Either way, at the end of the declared
Action, but before actually passing, handing off, or scoring, the vampire
must feed. If he is standing adjacent to one or more Thrall team-mates
(standing, prone or stunned), then choose one to bite and make an Injury
roll on the Thrall treating any casualty roll as Badly Hurt. The injury will
not cause a turnover unless the Thrall was holding the ball. Once the
Vampire has bitten a Thrall he may complete his Action.

Here, it clearly says the vampire may continue with his declared Action, unless he had declared a Block, in which case it can be changed to a move action. My vamp player doesn't quite agree with the above statement, where a failed BL becomes only a move action. Cause this also says you can conduct you declared action, but that BEFORE ACTUALLY passing, handing off or scoring, he must feed. Sounds to me he can declare an Pass, move adjacent to a thrall, bite him, and then throw the ball. It can't be written more clearly than that.

Could you precise this for me please ? Cause as a commish right now, I have a hard time telling him he couldn't play the rule the way it is written...

Fred

EDIT: precisions and typos.

[Cestodas]

Galak

Just to clarify the skill discription even more, why not add "blocking" in the sentence: "Either way, at the end of the declared Action, but before actually passing, handing off,scoring or blocking, the vampire must feed".

It seems strange to leave it out and could lead to some confusion regarding the blocking scenario.

Say a vampire declares a block action and rolls blood lust. He chooses to continue with the block since he is already standing next to a thrall. Some rules lawyers may argue, that since blocking is not specifically mentioned in the above sentence, the vampire is free to block, then bite, then follow up. Or even bite after the follow up.

[Grumbledook]

it is written thus for the following reasons:

say you move a thrall up to assist for a blitz with a vamp on say a black orc

you fail bloodlust but go to do your blitz, you have your thrall there for an assist and get 2 dice on the black orc
you can then bite said thrall

this is done as an improvement to blood lust as people thought it was too hurtful

however, vampire carrying the ball just short of making a touchdown
you move a thrall to the endzone to handoff to
you fail bloodlust and run up to the thrall, you hand it off and instant touchdown, drive ends no need to bite thrall so you get away with failing
same would go for passing

not sure i agree with it all tbh, though that is my take on why it is as it is
of course when you had to just do a move action none of this was an issue heh

[SBG]

I don't get what you're saying Grumbledook. In the rulebook, it says you have to bite the thrall before completing the pass or handoff or scoring. So in your example, if you bite the thrall before giving him the ball, he's not there to receive it if you injured him, thus, you get penalized for failing.

Fred

[GalakStarscraper]

Galak

Just to clarify the skill discription even more, why not add "blocking" in the sentence: "Either way, at the end of the declared Action, but before actually passing, handing off,scoring or blocking, the vampire must feed".

It seems strange to leave it out and could lead to some confusion regarding the blocking scenario.

Say a vampire declares a block action and rolls blood lust. He chooses to continue with the block since he is already standing next to a thrall. Some rules lawyers may argue, that since blocking is not specifically mentioned in the above sentence, the vampire is free to block, then bite, then follow up. Or even bite after the follow up.

It doesn't say blocking because it is now completely legal to throw the block, follow-up and bite with the new proposed rule.

You could not block, bite, and follow-up though because the bite is done at the end of the action so nothing else can be done after the bite other than throwing a pass or handing off the ball which are specifically mentioned in the rules as being moved to after the bite.

===

So its pretty simple.

Vampire fails blood lust ... continue doing whatever it was you were planning to do (but you have the OPTION to convert Block Action to Move Action if you wish) and when you are done you have to bite a thrall or leave the pitch.

The only exceptions to this are scoring, throwing the ball, and handing the ball off ... in only those cases you must bite the thrall first and then you are allow to do one of those 3 things.

===

So in Grumble's example ... you could not hand-off to a single Thrall in the endzone for a TZ because you'd have to bite him first before the handoff.

[DoubleSkulls]

Sounds to me he can declare an Pass, move adjacent to a thrall, bite him, and then throw the ball

That is exactly right.

[Cestodas]

It doesn't say blocking because it is now completely legal to throw the block, follow-up and bite with the new proposed rule.

Ah, thx for the response, it makes sense now. Just one more follow-up question then to be absolutely sure:

The above scenario: Vampire declares block, fails blood lust roll. Chooses to stay with the block action since he is standing next to a thrall.

1. The vampire gets knocked down trying to block. Obviously this is a turn over in it self, but is he allowed to bite the thrall next to him to avoid being removed from the field (before going down, or even while being prone)?

2. The vampire is wrestled down. Not a turn over in it self, but is he allowed to bite the thrall (either before going down or while prone), to avoid the turn over and avoid being removed from the field?

Thx

[GalakStarscraper]

It doesn't say blocking because it is now completely legal to throw the block, follow-up and bite with the new proposed rule.

Ah, thx for the response, it makes sense now. Just one more follow-up question then to be absolutely sure:

The above scenario: Vampire declares block, fails blood lust roll. Chooses to stay with the block action since he is standing next to a thrall.

1. The vampire gets knocked down trying to block. Obviously this is a turn over in it self, but is he allowed to bite the thrall next to him to avoid being removed from the field (before going down, or even while being prone)?

2. The vampire is wrestled down. Not a turn over in it self, but is he allowed to bite the thrall (either before going down or while prone), to avoid the turn over and avoid being removed from the field?

Thx

Be curious to hear Ian's throughts on this.

But as I read the rules ... the turnover prevents the ability to bite so in the first example ... he cannot bite a Thrall and is removed from the field.

In the 2nd example ... nothing in the Blood Lust text says you have to be standing (which I think we need to fix as a clarification (which we are allowed to do)) ... so at this time I would say yes ... if Wrestled down a Vampire could still bite.

Galak

[Gropah]

if Wrestled down a Vampire could still bite.

I can really picture a downed Vampire gnawing at a poor Thralls ankles, just out of spite