CRP+
Moderator: TFF Mods
-
- Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
- Posts: 1611
- Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:12 am
CRP+
CRP+ - 11 house rules to improve CRP Blood Bowl, approved for further unofficial testing by Tom Anders, Ian Williams and Stephen Babbage of the former BBRC
http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
How many of your leagues uses CRP+ rules????
http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
How many of your leagues uses CRP+ rules????
Reason: ''
- GalakStarscraper
- Godfather of Blood Bowl
- Posts: 15882
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
- Location: Indiana, USA
- Contact:
- daloonieshaman
- Legend
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:58 pm
- Location: Pasadena California
- Contact:
-
- Legend
- Posts: 5334
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
- Location: Copenhagen
- Contact:
Re: CRP+
Hi Stashman,
I know a handful that use CRP+ with NTBB rosters.
I'd guess more use straight CRP+, but I have no idea how many.
Cheers
Martin
I know a handful that use CRP+ with NTBB rosters.
I'd guess more use straight CRP+, but I have no idea how many.
Cheers
Martin
Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 288
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:07 pm
- Location: United Kingdom
Re: CRP+
My bad for not phrasing the question properly, the NTBB lists seem to suggest that they can have them on a 'normal' roll. That was just what I was trying to clarify.Gaixo wrote:They've always had access on doubles.
Reason: ''
-
- Legend
- Posts: 5334
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
- Location: Copenhagen
- Contact:
Re: CRP+
Hi Jembo17
Their roster does state: Troll, Ogre and Minotaur may only take a mutation on
a doubles skill roll.
(Also, Pact is listed as a roster with no changes)
Cheers
Martin
Their roster does state: Troll, Ogre and Minotaur may only take a mutation on
a doubles skill roll.
(Also, Pact is listed as a roster with no changes)
Cheers
Martin
Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 288
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:07 pm
- Location: United Kingdom
Re: CRP+
Cheers for that, i'll keep my mouth shut now(!).plasmoid wrote:Hi Jembo17
Their roster does state: Troll, Ogre and Minotaur may only take a mutation on
a doubles skill roll.
(Also, Pact is listed as a roster with no changes)
Cheers
Martin
Reason: ''
-
- Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
- Posts: 1395
- Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:12 pm
Re: CRP+
I really enjoy reading the changes to Plasmoids' set of rules and the fact they do change over time ( after testing I assume).
Personally I'd like Piling On to only be a skill useable during a Blitz action which would limit the crazy damage it can cause. Figure if you're gonna knock someone down and pile into them afterwards then you'll need the momentum of a running start.
It's sadly not that uncommon in games for the entire defensive LOS to evaporate before even getting a turn due to an offensive LOS of PO/MB(/Claw).
Personally I'd like Piling On to only be a skill useable during a Blitz action which would limit the crazy damage it can cause. Figure if you're gonna knock someone down and pile into them afterwards then you'll need the momentum of a running start.
It's sadly not that uncommon in games for the entire defensive LOS to evaporate before even getting a turn due to an offensive LOS of PO/MB(/Claw).
Reason: ''
-
- Emerging Star
- Posts: 457
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:40 pm
- Location: El Prat (Barcelona, Spain)
- Contact:
Re: CRP+
Sorry for recovering this thread.
I just wonder why these changes wasn't included in the LRB?
It is because 3 out of 4 members agreed and full consensus was necessary? (And just for curiosity, who was the BBRC member that did not agree with those 11 changes?)
Was a question of timing?
Thanks for clarifying that.
I just wonder why these changes wasn't included in the LRB?
It is because 3 out of 4 members agreed and full consensus was necessary? (And just for curiosity, who was the BBRC member that did not agree with those 11 changes?)
Was a question of timing?
Thanks for clarifying that.
Reason: ''
- Joemanji
- Power Gamer
- Posts: 9508
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 3:08 pm
- Location: ECBBL, London, England
Re: CRP+
Really easy answer. These changes were not included in the LRB because Martin devised them only after the LRB was 'completed'.
But even with the aid of a time machine a) Jervis has full veto and b) Martin is perhaps exaggerating when he suggests that certain people have signed off on NTBB or CRP+. My understanding is that some people have just said "Yeah, they look okay". Which is quite different to officially saying "this is exactly what I would have done if the BBRC existed now".
But even with the aid of a time machine a) Jervis has full veto and b) Martin is perhaps exaggerating when he suggests that certain people have signed off on NTBB or CRP+. My understanding is that some people have just said "Yeah, they look okay". Which is quite different to officially saying "this is exactly what I would have done if the BBRC existed now".
Reason: ''
*This post may have been made without the use of a hat.
-
- Emerging Star
- Posts: 457
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:40 pm
- Location: El Prat (Barcelona, Spain)
- Contact:
Re: CRP+
I assumed that.
What about the old question: Does NAF considered to endorse a new BBRC?
Some advice on this from the inside will be very welcome as well.
They have the power to provide consensus to the community (compared with more fragmented Mordheim, BF:G, etc.) and it seems there is margin for improvement of the rules (in this sense, should note Khemri are very unpopular, for example).
What about the old question: Does NAF considered to endorse a new BBRC?
Some advice on this from the inside will be very welcome as well.
They have the power to provide consensus to the community (compared with more fragmented Mordheim, BF:G, etc.) and it seems there is margin for improvement of the rules (in this sense, should note Khemri are very unpopular, for example).
Reason: ''
- Joemanji
- Power Gamer
- Posts: 9508
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 3:08 pm
- Location: ECBBL, London, England
Re: CRP+
I don't have knowledge of committee-level discussion, but this isn't something I have discussed with staff on even on a casual "what if?" basis. Any changes (even good ones) would fragment the community. Even if every NAF member universally approved of whatever a 'new BBRC' did, it would still create a divide between those in the know and those coming to the game new. I have some issues with the current CRP, but IMO the value of a central recognised ruleset far outweighs the value of improving the rules by 1% for the 1% of us who play often enough to notice. Which is a shame, because I think an evolving metagame would be a massive boon for Blood Bowl.
I also assume it would be no good for our relationship with GW. And that is something we know NAF has a firm policy on trying to maintain, or least not ruin.
I also assume it would be no good for our relationship with GW. And that is something we know NAF has a firm policy on trying to maintain, or least not ruin.
Reason: ''
*This post may have been made without the use of a hat.