Talk Fantasy Football

Hi everybody... just registered today!

Firstly, may i say i've been well impressed by what i've read on here; you guys really do seem to know your stuff! I look forward to your feedback on any topics i post in the future.

Moving on to my question, i am wondering if anyone can explain to me the reasoning behind permitting both a pass and a hand-off in the same team turn, and why they are permitted at any point in the turn... (apologies for the appalling length of this post by the way, and the somewhat clunky examples i've included!)

When i first played BB many moons ago, it was using the 2nd edition rules, where, if i am not mistaken, you were allowed to make one pass AFTER all the other stuff such as movement and blocks etc. had been resolved. Although in retrospect this was perhaps quite restricting and rigid, it seemed to me to have the positive effect of keeping your team turn as close to 'real time' as you could hope for with a turn based game.

To clarify a little, suppose that for arguments sake a team turn represents, say, 5 seconds of 'real-time'. If the pass action was permitted at ANY point during the turn, then a guy with the ball could perhaps run his full move allowance down the pitch (approx 5 seconds?) then pass the ball, which spends maybe another 3 seconds in the air, gets caught by the receiver, who then runs his full allowance (another 5 secs) into the end zone for a TD. In this example, the team has managed to cram 13 seconds of play into a turn where everyone on the pitch only has the same 5 seconds of simultaneous action available to them. Also, as the reciever could start his run AFTER the ball was thrown, he would have no doubt benefitted from receiving from a shorter range band than if he had to move upfield first.

Alternatively, using the end of turn pass rule from 2nd edition, the guy with the ball can still make his run down the pitch (5 seconds), the reciever is then activated and makes his 5 second run, which can be considered to be simultaneous to the passer's activity, (as he is not 'waiting' for the passer to close the distance and throw the ball!) and then finally, the ball is thrown, (maybe taking 4 seconds now, as it is a longer pass now!) giving a total of maybe 9 seconds.. much closer to the 5 seconds of real time that was proposed.

To me, the second of these examples makes the most sense. The problem i've experienced however is that with the CURRENT rules, the FIRST of the above examples seems to be closest to the way the game plays now.

If i may give one last example using LRB rules, and using a nice slow team for the ball carriers and a really fast set of opponents, say undead versus skaven, it would seem that even a slow witted, slow moving team can potentially move the ball upfield a worryingly long way against nimble adversaries who would surely be able to close them down much easier than the passing/hand-off guidelines permit them to, e.g:

Skeleton moves his 5 squares (possibly 7?), hands off to another skeleton, who moves his 5 squares at least, who then passes maybe 6 squares to a zombie, who THEN runs another 4 squares (possibly 6!) on top of that??? The undead have shifted the ball 20 squares, maybe 24 with GFI's! Even a gutter runner placed somewhere in the middle of all that but maybe just 1 square away from imposing a tackle zone would just seem to be standing there glued to the spot while this truly impressive chain of actions bypassed him uninterrupted.

Obviously with any turn based game there will be some degree of abstraction in terms of reaction/motion and elapsing of time, but allowing the pass to take place at any point, to me just seems to really stretch this abstraction to a crazy degree, especially when a hand-off is allowed in addition to this! Sure, i can appreciate that getting your players into positions where this kind of chain-action drive becomes a possibility is an art in itself, (as is setting a defence to counter it!) but when three players can all take actions one after the other (as they must be as each is dependent on the previous one completing his action first) then it just seems a little strange...

Surely it is more reasonable to only allow a pass once everyone has made their moves? Or at the very least, only allow a pass OR a hand-off per turn, rather than both?

I had a good few years away from gaming, and have only fairly recently gotten in to bloodbowl again, using the LRB as my guide now. I have only played a dozen or so games so far (opponents sadly lacking here!) So am VERY much the rookie. If i am missing some crucial point in the rules, or am just getting it all horribly wrong, then please let me know! On the whole, i've found the current rules to play very smoothly, and have had some classic encounters on the pitch already. It really was just this one issue that both myself and my friends noticed while playing that really made us think "hmm.. that seems kinda odd that you are allowed to do that.." I am guessing that it is because the game is limited turns now, and that being able to shift the ball up the pitch with haste is all important, or maybe it was because passing was too risky an option before.

I hope i don't sound like i'm critiscising what is a fine set of rules, I'm really just interested in hearing what experienced players believe is the reasoning behind allowing such freedom with passing and hand-offs, and the advantages in terms of gameplay over the old 'pass after movement' system.

Phew, thats it! Apologies once again for this overlong post, i'll be sure to make any future ones a good deal shorter. Kind regards, John.

Good grief...asking questions about second edition...I think I erased those files from my database quite some time ago, so I think the comparison you're after will have to come from elsewhere.

I think the ruling itself is no more than a mechanic. It would be interesting to try the game out with just one or the other each turn (that'll teach them darned Elves and Skaven.) but I thinks its really just a case of shrugging and getting on with it. It has been said several times around here that we shouldn't be desperate to make BB make as much sense as possible. Not only are we talking about a game where dwarfs, elves and orcs 1) exist, 2) play sports and 3) are actually allowed free passage through each others' territories to play these games despite the wars that are pepetually being fought between pretty much every race, but if we follow your five to nine second thing, that means a half of BB lasts 9x16 seconds...about two and a half minutes, with each team spending about half THAT time standing stock still and doing nothing.

Really, its best not to think too hard about these things. You tend to attract guys like Pink Horror who will take this thread and go off on some hugely confusing physics lesson on it, before blaming the BBRC for it.

Welcome to the board by the way...and if you're struggling for opponents the best places to try would be GW Canterbury if such a thing exists, or see if there's a gaming club up at the university where there are players.

Welcome Aboard =)

1: Firstly, you're right, it is an abstraction in as much as chess is an abstraction of warfare. While I understand your reasoning with respect to how fast you can move the ball, in practice it simply does not work that way.

The movement point system allows a coach to accurately determine exactly how far a player can get downfield in any given turn and it's up to the coach to ensure that they always have players in a position to cover the deepest possible reciever. It's all part of the balance of the game. Your undead example, while good on paper, does not bear itself out on the board where you need to ensure that you pay attention to factors like field position and player support.

The pass/handoff give and go play you described was a staple of the 3rd edition and is still popular with elven teams now. The opposing coach is fully aware of this and must play to ensure that (a) the thrower is under pressure in the backfield (b) there are no players in the centre of the pitch who can take the pass and get a clear run downfield (c) all recievers in potential scoring position are covered or lines to them are blocked. How well they achieve any or all of these objectives is mark of their skill as a coach.

2: If you're looking for opponents in Canterbury I know of one or two people who are regularly up for a game. Send me a private message if you're interested and I'll put you in contact.

Marcus

Hi Valedictor,

Welcome to TBB, If you are looking for opponents there are three of us in Ashford who are looking to get a small league together. (Unfortunetly I just moved FROM Canterbury!)

I'm sure we could travel up there if neccessary. If you are interested in only local opponents the Games Workshop in Caterbury apparently has a Blood Bowl night every Tuesday after 5:30.

Send me a PM if you are interested in getting together...

Diesel

Hi guys, many thanks for your feedback.. most appreciated!

I did just type out a lengthy post by way of response to some of your comments (and i said i would be keeping my posts short from now! lol) but regrettably my connection cut out midway through, and i lost it all... rather than type it all out again and no doubt bore u all stupid, i will instead just thank you for all your suggestions /offers of opponents.

Games Workshop Canterbury does indeed have a BB night on Tuesdays, but i have so far been unable to get there for that particular night of the week (working).

Diesel, Marcus, i will be in touch regarding your kind offers of pointing me in the right direction for nearby opponents... thank you!

Chat to you all again soon, all the best, John

this is my first post so forgive me my tresspasses.

i believe that in the new living rules (available at GW site) the player is not allowed to hand off as a free action. this will mean that a player cannot blitz and then pick up the ball and hand it off. i think this will slow down the play and therefore you should not get so many handoff/pass plays.

Absolutely. This has probably hurt finesse teams (elves) quite hard as the short pass, hand-off score move is a lot harder to pull off now.

Ian

Hi Nerm, and welcome...

Not sure about not getting so many pass/hand off plays as you mentioned, i think that if you want to take the pass option on your drive, then by all means do so. (hope that's what you meant, apologies if it wasn't) My main observation was that by allowing a pass AND a hand off in the same turn, it lets teams take real liberties with how far they can shift the ball upfield in one turn. I merely thought that it would make more sense to allow only one or the other per turn. That would still allow a team to move the ball a good distance (for example, move, pass, catch, move... a chain of actions that would STILL let you move the ball a good way up the pitch, maybe even the full distance with a fast team?) while keeping the offensive motion more 'in timing' with the defensive responsive actions.

With the way the rules play in the Living rule book, you can in theory move, hand off, move, pass, catch and then move again all in the same turn. In my opinion, (and i believe i'm VERY much in the minority!) that just seems plain wrong to me. At least some portion of that 'chain' belongs in your next team turn, AFTER the defense has at least had some opportunity to react a bit swifter to the drive. (to offer a crude analogy, to me, it's like playing chess, and every once in a while allowing someones queen to move twice in the same turn).

As some of the wise ones have already pointed out to me, it is the mark of a good coach to be aware of how far the ball could be moved, and setting a suitable defence against it. I totally agree, but to me, that is again like saying (with the clumsy chess analogy) that you know that the opponents queen might move twice next turn, and so best make preparations for it. If the rule was use one OR the other, you would:

a.) still have to be mindful of offensive penetration capabilities, as ball movement potential is still great, (those skaven/elf chain plays can still be exploited, only more reasonably now in my opinion)

b.) still have to set a safe defence with players back to cover (they just wouldn't be quite so stretched to contain the offence, and so they could interract with the other players more, rather than twiddling their thumbs/claws/mutated bits in the backfield waiting for someone to come within range),

c.) integrate offensive and defensive activity more smoothly. yes, it's a turn based game, no, it's not a simulation of something real, but the generally excellent rules that are in place serve to convey a great feeling of simultaneous activity from both sides (just as overwatch counters achieve in Space Hulk, Epic, and the like...sorry if you don't know these games by the way!) It's just my humble opinion that the pass AND handoff in the same turn detracts from the overall effect of simultaneous activity created so well by all the other rules.

Sorry for the lengthy discourse here; not all of this was in response to your post Nerm, but rather some elaboration on my own original post. I can't stress enough however that all this is only my opinion (an opinion formed from too little experience of the game) and certainly not any bitter dig at the rules! Just seems to make sense to me I'n sure with a few more games under my belt, i'll see that it's no big deal at all.

Cheers all, John

Ahh, i see what you are getting at now in your post, Nerm, sorry i misunderstood your point, (begs forgiveness for his dull-wittedness)

John

Not allowing a Hand-off and Pass in the same turn would result in a huge swing in favour of the slower/beat 'em up teams.
In it's favour though, it would severly hamper Longfang in his 'all-too-regular-against-all-odds-last-turn-desperate-TDs' that he always seems to pull off against me. Bloody spawny git!

hi Deathwing,

Do you really think it would be a HUGE swing? Even with just move,pass catch,move, the skaven for example could still shift the ball virtually the length of the pitch with a long pass (with the pass skill for the thrower making it a not too reckless endeavour?) They could probably even still make the endzone with some GFI's or a long bomb.

Even if they do fall a bit short of the mark, they are still DEEP in defensive territory and present a BIG threat to be closed down by next turn.

And the defence still would have to get to them to hit them, and if it is indeed a slow power team, their slower MA would not always make this a walk in the park.

I think it would lead to a lot more 'edge of the endzone' encounters, with the ball carrier just struggling that little bit more to get to the endzone, and the defenders still straining to close the distance. Surely more exciting than just watching a gutter runner speed straight past a zombie unchallenged for a touchdown straight away in one turn?

As i have mentioned numerous times before, i really don't have your degree of experience in terms of putting this theory inton practice on the pitch, so i am only hypothesizing based on my limited experience and what seems to be a more reasonable ruling to me.

So, until i get some more games under my belt, i would agree that yes, it is a swing in favour of the power teams, but no, not a great swing..just enough of a swing to make things interesting, while not penalising either offence or defence in a dramatic way. I'm sure you would be able to recount many a match situation which would prove me entirely wrong though!

Many thanks for your feedback, all the best, John.

Personally I find the end-to-end plays possible in a single turn the most rewarding part of blood bowl.

There is something great about watching your opponent's jaw drop in disbelief as you pull of such a stunning play.

Admittedly being on the receiving end isn't so much fun,

Ian

thanks for the welcome dude.

but i am sorry, i don't think i would refer to skaven as a slow moving hit em hard team. for me the gutter runners are as cool and as fast as the wood elf catcher. if you think of move slow hit hard think chaos or possibly orc although they have average agility.

and with the last post, yea i did mean the change of possession rather than the recieving team

those living rules made a big difference to the game. diving tackle, stand firm and mighty blow to say the least. i have a friend who did not read the rules through B4 choosing lizards, he saw the error of his ways when he had no skinks left on the pitch at the start of the second half, he had no agility to pick up the ball,

heheh...sorry Nerm, but i think it's your turn to misunderstand me in my example, i was saying that the skaven were the fast moving ball carriers, and the zombie was part of the slow moving undead defence...

cheers, John.

Sorry


yea the misunderstand is easy