NAF response to possible BB2 rule changes

[TheAzman]

Jesus Christ..... All of this harping about a game that is fine as is. LRB6/CRP/Icepelt seems just fine to me. It makes me nervous when people talk about changing the rules and possibly making entire teams obsolete in the process. Whining about what a freakin computer game may do to the tabletop game is completely ludicrous. Either you like the PC game as is, or you don't. You like the tabletop game as is, or you don't. If you want to tweak the rules for your own home league? Go ahead. People do it all over the world. Does the computer game have to change the way we play the damned tabletop game? NO! Who cares what Cyanide does? It's their choice what goes on in the PC game. They are welcome to it. Just because they added a funny looking medieval team and a little extra armor on a Human catcher doesn't mean that we should all hop on the bandwagon and demand a new BBRC to change rules or ask the NAF to get into it. Why do some of you people want evolving rules that change every so often (like WFB or 40K) and have to rebuy stuff because some book/rules pack says so? Count me out. I'll stick to playing the rules as-is. I'll even take minor tweaks to the rules as long as they are just that, minor. There doesn't have to be a split in the community. So, the PC gamers who want to play tabletop may have to play a slightly different game than they are used to. Too bad. Deal with it. The tabletoppers may play the PC game and not like some of the rules changes they may have. Too bad. Deal with it. A tournament organizer wants to use the PC rules and you don't like it? Suck it up or don't play in the tournament. All of the power in making the decisions on how we play is in our own hands. There are 24 teams in the LRB/CRP/Icepelt rules. So what if like, 6 or 7 teams out of the whole bunch suck worse than the others? DON'T PLAY THEM IF YOU DON'T WANT TO!!! So what if like, 8 or 9 teams are way better than the rest of the whole bunch? I've seen EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. OF. THEM. taste defeat/get kicked by the 'lower tiers' at some point. If you only want to play the high end teams because they are 'better', well, then you're welcome to it.*yawn*

Sorry for the heated rant. Just blame it on my Yankee hard-headedness. I just don't want a PC game dictating the route a TABLETOP game takes. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who thinks that way, either. If anyone has taken offense to what I have just posted.....too bad. Deal with it.

<language edit - sann>

[plasmoid]

Hi Spubbbba,
IMO there are 2 things fundamentally wrong with that parallel:
a) in real sports nobody gets killed making the next game even harder.
b) in real sports the underdogs get paid to play. In a board game for fun you just get to spend 3 hours in a not particularly exciting manner.
Cheers
Martin

[Geggster]

The thread has morphed into a right/wrong of NTBB. What changes people would like to see has merit, but was not the thread's intention.

I am genuinely interested in how people could see a rules committee working in practice (NAF or otherwise) and who it would effect. Can I perhaps steer us back to that?

I consider that Cyanide will do exactly as they want and TT tourney rules seem pretty balanced. So wouldn't a new BBRC would have pretty limited scope?

Are we really suggesting getting the best minds in BB together from TT, Cyanide and FUMBBL, to discuss rosters and core rules, only for Cyanide to ignore it completely and tourneys to have a couple of new or slightly amended rosters? Because if so, a BBRC might only really benefit FUMBBL (and they are more than capable of making any tweaks themselves).

[harvestmouse]

Sorry for the heated rant. Just blame it on my Yankee hard-headedness. I just don't want a PC game dictating the route a TABLETOP game takes. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who thinks that way, either. If anyone has taken offense to what I have just posted.....too bad. Deal with it.

How often do such environments last though? At the turn of the 90s, there was a firm following for 2nd ed BB and 3rd ed Warhammer. However you don't get any new blood, and numbers decrease and then the stalwart supporters become disenchanted.

When CRP replaced lrb 4 on FUMMBL, it seemed many wouldn't go with the change, so there were 2 open divisions. An unsupported lrb 4 died over night.

If the NAF decide to go on their own path, without any means of bringing new blood. The NAF will not last long. Advertising and a hook is fundamental.

Also I'm not sure anybody wants a radical overhaul of the core rules. They play very well. What I'm saying and others is that different formats need some elements that are bespoke. Nothing that is in game, and will affect the gaming mechanics.

[frogboy]

Lots of people would be happy for the rules to stay the same though, I agree with TheAzman that I don't want a computer game to dictate how the board game plays. As far as I know FUMBBL has always been about replicating the game (board game) online for people who can't find propper games. Well that's what it's always been about for me. Cyinide on the other hand is just out to make money and I know there are some members on here involved in the devolpment of the PC game so people can be bias.

As far as a committee goes, then things like this are always subject to the influence of "motivated" people or the same guys who are in the click, but what are their real motivations.
It's abit like a job interview, the right person dosnt always get the job, it's ussally the person who bullshit enough in the interview who dose and they are always the first person to go on long term sick once they passed their probationary period

And yes my spelling is shite, deal with it

[Toffer]

I have no problem with Cyanide adding a new team. In fact (provided they are not broken in some way) I would love to see new teams added to the TT list for local leagues and international tourneys alike. IMHO Khorne is not broken and neither are Apes. I will reserve judgement on brettonian's for now as I have no frame of reference having never played them.

I have a few problems with possible additional rules to the CRP. I don't have a problem with a BBRC looking at what is broken and looking for fixes but I do have issues with Cyanide bringing in new rules or bringing back rules from previous editions. I have heard of a possible aging rule and this makes me a bit wary. we shall see.

I do have a massive problem with a change to an existing team. There is no reason to change human player AV values and I hope this was a mistake that will be rectified before the game comes out. Humans were not broken and do not need fixing.

I respect NAF for saying they will not jump to make changes to the CRP based on Cyanide BB2.

[Darkson]

Aging is confirmed (though not exactly as the old aging), but after a lot of social media pressure they have backtracked and made it optional for private leagues.

[plasmoid]

Hi all,
I was very pleasantly surprised to see VoodooMike basically present every key argument behind NTBB.
I know that doesn't mean that he likes the implementation at all, but it was certainly interesting all the same.
I totally agree with Geggster that this shouldn't turn into a discussion for and against NTBB.

Given Cyanides recent interview, we know that this time they've written their code to be better allow for hot-fixes - and that they plan to test/introduce some tweaks. Like many computer games do.

I have no idea how much of their costumer base is actually TT-gamers, but they might just be inclined to listen, rather than alienate this group.
So perhaps, just perhaps, this is the time for a NAF-BBRC to reach out to Cyanide, rather than just wait to see what they come up with.

Cheers
Martin

[Wulfyn]

Cyanide is the official ruleset because they own the rights. As long as GW let them then there is really nothing we can do to prevent them changing the rules however they want. We don't need to adopt those rules, but if you want official that is as official as it gets.

Everything else is just house rules. The NAF and FUMBBL can do whatever they like because nobody can stop them. If the NAF say "we have a group of people that want to play a certain way and to join you have to agree to it" then they can. It's just like FUMBBL bringing in the Simian team. You also have a ton of leagues that all do their thing. Even on FUMBBL the different leagues can have adapting rules (e.g. Right Stuff preventing Tackle from working against Dodge on a Block/Blitz), and there are plans for greater customisation I hear. So the base point is that everyone can do what they like.

The reason for this is that you can't IP a game's rule set. Copyright protects an author's expression of that game (artwork, literary, etc.) but cannot protect the game mechanics from someone developing a similar (or near identical) game. They will scare you with their big bad lawyers, but they won't win. That's the real reason why GW gave Cyanide a licence option.

So you can't call your game Blood Bowl (registered Trademark). You can't use troll slayers with bright orange hair (artistic expression in both visuals and naming). You can't use Cabal Vision (established piece of literature). But picking a ball up on a 3+ with AG4 in one tackle zone you absolutely can do. This is why GW has and always will push the story, artwork, and modelling of their games as it makes them more money, is much better, and can be protected from copying. So anyone can change all or any of the rules, in part or in full, at any time with no permission from anyone required.


All this boils it down to just one question: How much does the community value a single ruleset?

There is obviously value in keeping a common ruleset for simplicity and clarity. But if people can't agree there is nothing to bind them to the ideas and values of other designers. And looking at the theme of this thread there are a lot of people with a lot of different ideas. So if you really value a common ruleset then you are going to have to make compromises. Cyanide have an obligation to their employees and shareholders to make the game as enjoyable as possible, so they are not going to keep a ruleset they think is broken just because JJ was on a committee a few years ago.

The alternative is that the NAF decides to get ahead of the game, and work with Cyanide to adapt the rules in a way that is mutually beneficial. There is a lot of skill and experience in the TT community that can identify the issues that occur, and by doing this in advance you can prevent the drip drip of changes that although are well adapted to the digital communities are much harder for offline play.

[Darkson]

Cyanide is the official ruleset because they own the rights. As long as GW let them then there is really nothing we can do to prevent them changing the rules however they want. We don't need to adopt those rules, but if you want official that is as official as it gets.

Not unless they change the rulebook they themselves hosr (currently LRB6/Icepelt).

They will scare you with their big bad lawyers, but they won't win. That's the real reason why GW gave Cyanide a licence option.

Wrong. GW would have won if the court case had gone through because Cyanide had used stuff GW could trademark (the Orc Red Sun for one) in Chaos League. They gave them a license because it was actually better for them monetarily than the court award would have been (as Cyanide were/are a small company).

[Vanguard]

Are we really suggesting getting the best minds in BB together from TT, Cyanide and FUMBBL, to discuss rosters and core rules, only for Cyanide to ignore it completely and tourneys to have a couple of new or slightly amended rosters? Because if so, a BBRC might only really benefit FUMBBL (and they are more than capable of making any tweaks themselves).

This suggests that the NAF focus remains on TT tournaments. The current committee are intending to raise the profile of Leagues within the NAF and provide more support for League play so rules tweaks for the benefit of leagues rather than tournaments would not be out of place. FUMBBL have also said that they will follow the NAF's lead, so presumably they would support a NAF BBRC.

I like Sann's idea of a survey but I'm starting to think we may need someone to run for President on a platform of reforming the BBRC and updating the ruleset in order to get a definitive answer from the NAF membership.

[Regash]

Cyanide is the official ruleset because they own the rights. As long as GW let them then there is really nothing we can do to prevent them changing the rules however they want. We don't need to adopt those rules, but if you want official that is as official as it gets.

Wrong.
Cyanide does have a license, correct.
But do they own the rights to Blood Bowl?
Absolutely not!

Cyanide has a license for producing computer games. That's it.
They can't change the LRB, the can't produce new minis, they can't publish novels of any kind, they an't publish a new edition of the board game.
All they can do is to develop and publish a computer game.
Games Workshop probably has a thumb on even that as they have to nod it off, but, honestly, I'm not sure about that.

Cyanide is official as far as it concerns their game.
No less but also no more.

[Wulfyn]

Cyanide is the official ruleset because they own the rights. As long as GW let them then there is really nothing we can do to prevent them changing the rules however they want. We don't need to adopt those rules, but if you want official that is as official as it gets.

Not unless they change the rulebook they themselves hosr (currently LRB6/Icepelt).

Which would be oh so difficult to do, right? That's a whole file they would need to change. Oh the humanity!

They will scare you with their big bad lawyers, but they won't win. That's the real reason why GW gave Cyanide a licence option.

Wrong. GW would have won if the court case had gone through because Cyanide had used stuff GW could trademark (the Orc Red Sun for one) in Chaos League. They gave them a license because it was actually better for them monetarily than the court award would have been (as Cyanide were/are a small company).

GW's aim was to stop Cyanide producing a game. GW might have been awarded some small amount for a bit of artwork infringement, but they would not have won their case to stop Cyanide from making the game because you cannot copyright a game. As you say the best bet GW had was to licence the game as they would make more money than they would from the court case, and they would have not been able to stop them anyway. That is also why it was important that the ownership of Chaos League went the other way.

There also seems to be some confusion around the difference between copyright and trademarks. The GW logo is a trademark as it indicates the source of the material (the Nike tick and McDonald arches fulfil the same criteria). Artwork within the game can be copyrighted to the parent company, but that does not make it a trademark. The law is quite different for these things.

On a similar note this is why FUMBBL still exists. They could not use the word Blood Bowl, reference any GW owned material, or use any of their artwork. But the core game rules cannot be protected.

[Darkson]

Oh so sorry to use the wrong word. All right, Cyanide use GW copyrighted artwork (the Orc red sun for example). The rest of my point is correct. GW would have won the case, the award would have probably closed Cyanide down. GW felt they would make more money by letting Cyanide make an official version. They didn't give them the license becayse they couldn't stop them, they could have shut them down, they gave them the license because doing so got them more money than theyd have got from the vourt case.

[Wulfyn]

Cyanide is the official ruleset because they own the rights. As long as GW let them then there is really nothing we can do to prevent them changing the rules however they want. We don't need to adopt those rules, but if you want official that is as official as it gets.

Wrong.
Cyanide does have a license, correct.
But do they own the rights to Blood Bowl?
Absolutely not!

Cyanide has a license for producing computer games. That's it.
They can't change the LRB, the can't produce new minis, they can't publish novels of any kind, they an't publish a new edition of the board game.
All they can do is to develop and publish a computer game.
Games Workshop probably has a thumb on even that as they have to nod it off, but, honestly, I'm not sure about that.

Cyanide is official as far as it concerns their game.
No less but also no more.

As I stated at length there is no such thing as the rights of a game ruleset because it cannot be copyrighted. I could make a 'new' game today, with exactly the same rules as Blood Bowl, call it "Field of Death", rewrite the rules in my own words, do a deal with ff-fields and willy miniatures, grab some ausbowl dice, put it all in a box and sell it and GW could not do a thing about it.

Cyanide own the right to use all of the GW copyrighted material, including the trademarked name. The own these rights because they purchased them under licence from GW. The rights, sure, are restricted to a digital version of release, but nobody else has anything better. They could change every rule in the book if they wanted to, and that would be as official as it gets.

LRB6 / CRP has no more legitimacy than anything else, other than that which the community wishes to use.