Great new idea for rerolls

Raven_Talons · Post by **Raven_Talons** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:37 am

I wsa thinking about wat rerolls mean in bloodbowl. It repents the training a team does. The coordiation. Well...wat happen if someone dies and someone takes there place. Things arent the same for a while to things get cordited. And if a lot of people die then things get more messed up. ANd the more team is insync with there team the more they lose when somoen leaves. Well to show this I was thing there should be one mroe thing at the end of the match. Roll 2d6 if any team members die or yuo choose to let go. Now for each player that leaves you get a +1 to the dice rolls. So say 2 die and you let one go that is +3. No add the number of rerolls you have. So say you have 3 rerolls add plus 3( to repenst the more your insynch the more you could lose by changing players) now if you get a 14+ you lose a reroll permently. So say you had one person die that is a +1 and you have 3 rerolls that is +3 for a grand total of +4 and you reroll 2d6 you gwet 8 for +4 for a grand total of 12 and no lose of reroll. Wat do you tink

Snew · Post by **Snew** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:42 am

I tink you need to get the "h" fixed on your keyboard.

Raven_Talons · Post by **Raven_Talons** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 4:50 am

so that is it. No respond on thingking if its a good idea or not

Dark Lord (retired) · Post by **Dark Lord (retired)** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 5:04 am

I think you need to write it clearer. I'm no sure I understand it.

Relborn · Post by **Relborn** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 5:55 am

Toby ? It's you right ???

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 8:18 am

To get back to the original post:

yes, it would be realistic from the fluff, but it sucks as a game mechanic.
Losing players is bad enough, no need to have a chance to lose Rerolls with them. Could be unbalancing in favour of the high AV teams too.

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:11 am

Can someone translate that into english? I've seen spaniards produce more readable posts.

Sushé Wakka · Post by **Sushé Wakka** » Mon Jun 30, 2003 1:50 pm

ianwilliams wrote: Can someone translate that into english? I've seen spaniards produce more readable posts.

Oi! That offended me!

Now really, do we write english SO bad?

duff · Post by **duff** » Wed Jul 02, 2003 8:23 am

not always.

The idia is realistic, but I'd hate to suffer from it too much

Robotorz · Post by **Robotorz** » Wed Jul 02, 2003 8:46 am

Well as far as I understood he wants you to roll after a game if you loose a re-roll if a player dies or you force him to go (or become a ass. coach).

You roll with 2d6 and add the number of re-rolls and the dead or fired players to it (2d6+ # of dead players+ # of rerolls). But then I dont know what happens. I asume that if you the roll with the added numbers is above 14 then you loose a reroll. If you roll below then you dont loose a reroll.

I dont like this Idea at all. Dwarf teams will suffer from that (usualy having lots of re-rolls). Elfes, Gobos, Flings will suffer from this a lot. They often have to replace players and therefore often will loose players.

It only makes the game even harder for teams having problems with dead players already. Orcs, Chaos, ..., dont have lots of dead players and therefore will not have to replace their lost rerolls that often.

I think bashing someone trying his best to write in a forign language is not the way to go. Either correct his mistakes to help him get better or dont bother at all.

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Wed Jul 02, 2003 11:21 am

Sushé Wakka wrote:
ianwilliams wrote: Can someone translate that into english? I've seen spaniards produce more readable posts.
Oi! That offended me!

Now really, do we write english SO bad?

No offence meant - I should have used Italians instead

It just

me off when people who ought to know better write complete gibberish. I don't have a problem with non-English speakers - but most of them are actually understandable than this guy.

SkavenGoblinfood · Post by **SkavenGoblinfood** » Wed Jul 02, 2003 4:25 pm

I do think that it is a good idea, it also makes sence. However, you also need to take into account that the more coaches you have, the less likely you are going to lose training. I say you DONT get +1 to the roll if you make them an assistant coach. Also, I say that you get -1 for every ASSISTANT coach, not including the head coach, because they help keep the team together. Also, this new step should come just before the purchase phase, and therefor you dont have to worry about new coaches. If you make Assistant coaches give -1 to the role however, I find them more useful and should therefore cost 20k each instead of 10k.

This is a test moo
moo
I wonder if that works^

tchatter · Post by **tchatter** » Wed Jul 02, 2003 4:58 pm

I always thought that rerolls represented that little bit of 'extra training' that you recieved? Not what keeps the team 'coordinated', that is what the head coach is for. The rerolls are supposed to represent the amount of practice that a team has put in, I think.

In which case, I think that things are working fine. Honestly, after I have scrimped and saved for x amount of games to buy a 100k+ reroll, I don't really want a chance to lose that, plus my dead player! That would be killer. Imagine your 130k Minotaur dies and you lose a 120k reroll, that is a lot of cash, time, and effort that you just lost due to a bum roll on the dice? I don't think so.

Count me out on this one...

Asperon Thorn · Post by **Asperon Thorn** » Wed Jul 02, 2003 5:46 pm

For people that had trouble understanding, because of typos and sub par grammar I did Mr. Talons a favor and corrected it. This is to avoid incidents we have had in the past with people posting with poor grammar.

Mr. Ravens Really wrote:I was thinking about what rerolls mean in bloodbowl. They represent the training a team does, or the coordination. Well...what happen if someone dies and someone takes their place? Things just aren’t the same for a while, as things must get coordinated, again. And if a lot of people die then things get even more messed up. And the more players are in sync with their team, the more they lose when someone leaves. Well to show this I was thinking there should be another addition at the end of the match. Roll 2d6 if any team members died/retired/leave in disgust (as the case in concessions). Now, for each player no longer on the roster add +1 to the roll. So say 2 die and you let one go that is +3. Now add the number of rerolls you have. So say you have 3 rerolls add 3 (in order to represent the more your team is in sync, the more you could lose by changing players) now if you get a 14+ you lose a reroll permently.

So say you had one person die that is a +1 and you have 3 rerolls that is +3 for a grand total of +4 and you reroll 2d6 you get 8 for +4 for a grand total of 12 and no lose of reroll.

What do you think?

Personnally, I don't like the idea for much of the reason that Tchatter said.

Asperon Thorn

Dark Lord (retired) · Post by **Dark Lord (retired)** » Wed Jul 02, 2003 6:18 pm

I think that having more rerolls should be a good thing. The more a team works as a team the less difference 1 person makes.

I think if you wanted to do that a good way would be to make the target number the number of rerolls - the number of players that died on the team. Then roll under it on a D8.

Example:

Team A has 5 rerolls and 1 players dies. They must roll a 4 or lower on a D8. (5 rerolls - 1 dead player = 4)

The biggest problem is that you are ignoring game balance for a sense of what you perceive as realism.
What happens when a rookie AV 7 team suffers 3 or 4 deaths in the first game? Now not only are they under-manned but they have to try to buy rerolls back too.
You are punishing them for being punished...not a good idea.

Talk Fantasy Football

Great new idea for rerolls

Great new idea for rerolls

I like it... kinda