New skaven WA

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 9:11 pm

Seeing as there's a lot of ill feeling about WA being to negative ( or shock horror! not negative enough) I've been trying to think of a new skaven WA.
Using the Skaven Army book (the new one) I thought about this.

Tie in the "really stupid" rule with 3rd ed WA (ie attack nearest player). this fits with the fluff that RO's rely on the Packmasters for instructions.

I couldn't work out a way to add mino's as it doesn't really suit the fluff.

I don't have a copy of "classic" 3rd ed so if this suggestion is similar (or the same) as the original I aplogise for wasting your time.

Zy-Nox · Post by **Zy-Nox** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 11:39 pm

The Gold edition Wild animal was a 2+ roll before you took its action,
On a 2+ it can behave normaly on a 1... uh oh goes bonkers and attacks the nearest player....friend or foe, I actually found this very funny when a Mino chases down your ball carrier and nails him.

But I dont mind either version of the skill, it just depends if people know how too use the current version.

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 11:42 pm

Kinda liked the old version, seemed more WILD than the new one.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 11:45 pm

I'd still like RO to be really stupid as it ties in with their history.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 7:38 am

I've actually been campaigning to replace WA with Really Stupid and leave it at that.

The problem with going with a "Wild" theme is that if you introduce random psycho blocking, there's a chance that the WA will hit an opponent. Some people in the BBRC were utterly opposed to the idea of a negative trait possibly being good.

The other thing is that I don't mind forcing blocks, I even like forcing fouls, just don't make the player do it first in the turn, and give them the option to do nothing. There needs to be a tactical amelioration of risk, like with other negative traits.

manusate · Post by **manusate** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 11:06 pm

Current Wild Animal:

1) Must take first action.

2) Must block/blitz opponent if standing on his tackle zone.

3) Cannot receive assists when blocking or fouling.

Just remove one. IMHO it should be the second. You keep the 1st and the 3rd, and that´s it. Player cannot be turnover-locked, but still has some big handicap.

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:01 am

I agree that the mandatory blocking part of the rule should be dropped, this means if the team wishes to make an important move first and does not want to chance the player they must forgo his action.

Although this is 'less wild' than forcing the player to block, if he is allowed to block/blitz after other more important moves then this could be seen as being not much of a disadvantage; often it's what you wanted to do anyway, with the chance of moving players you don't want to block by blocking them with other team members first.

Also remember that hitting the player next to them is largely what Mummies and Treemen do anyway and they don't grumble!

manusate · Post by **manusate** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 9:56 pm

The must go first is huge. The must block combined with that is what causes the "infinite" turnover lock.

But if you remove the must go first, then the must block is not such a big con, methinks. He´ll do it anyway if he is in advantage.

franck_le_grand · Post by **franck_le_grand** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 11:20 pm

What! Remove the must block/blitz!
No way. Then WA isn't a negative skill at all.
Oh yeah you have to make his action first, big thing! And oh you have no assist, wow huh???

Not at all! Who cares about him taking the first action, and if he's standing somewhere where he could make a turnover just don't do anything with him.

And who cares about the assist. It's not like that when a WA blocks a ST 3 player there is 3 other guys around him in no tackle zones to assist, right? And again you can choose to not do anything with the WA player.

The only time the no assist rule is bad is combined with the must block.
Therefor if you want to make some changes to this skill don't just remove the must block!

IMO the WA skill is bad. Maybe too bad, but doing this would make it a negative skill you wouldn't worry about. But still I'd like to see some changes to this skill.

manusate · Post by **manusate** » Mon Oct 28, 2002 10:08 pm

Just compare it with bonehead. Going first is a BIG con. Big enough, if you like.

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:46 pm

That's what most ppl don't seem to understand.

Having to move a player first (or not at all) is almost like the bonehead skill. In at least 1/6 of the turns the WA player won't do anything because any action would have a good chance to ruin your complete turn.

With bonehead i can wait till most of the crutial actions are played and then i roll a 1 ... so what ...

I personally think that Move first in combination with no RRs for Big Guys is bad enough (and there are no positive side effects from that negative skill).

I guess we'll be playing it that way in my league, otherwise we won't see Minos or Rat Ogres very much.

Tim.

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:52 pm

Perfectly put Tim. I think thats how i'll present the case to the rest of my league.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 11:02 pm

franck_le_grand wrote:Not at all! Who cares about him taking the first action, and if he's standing somewhere where he could make a turnover just don't do anything with him.

That's the whole point though, isn't it? You can't "just don't do anything with him" because you are forced to do something.

No Assists, No Rerolls and must move first are suitably nasty IMO and I've coached Skaven with every variant of WA published and several that haven't.

The WA has a tactical choice to make - Start the turn with the big guns and risk turning over right there without a reroll? or forego use of the WA that turn. Remembering of course that if he can't claim assists his blocking/blitzing choices may be limited. In practice you lose more turns with a WA due to those two rules than you do with Bonehead or Really Stupid.

I'm actually happy to keep the forced block aspect in the rules as it means you dont' get Stand Firm Ratogres dodging away at the start of every turn.

Amend the "must block" portion to include the option to do nothing and say "If the WA takes an action and there is an adjacent enemy player they must take a block or blitz action against that player.

It puts the tactical risk in there, it still allows opponents to heavily mark and neutralise the WA but it keeps the decision in the coaches hands. Their player, their tactical risk.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 11:14 pm

It would be sad if the current WA made RO rare in BB.

The skaven coach in the league took one in his 5th game and put him on the LOS (remember we were all rookies). After that game the RO was used as a deep safety, often setting up on the TD line. The coach stated if he'd known hownegative WA was compared to Bonehead or really stupid he wouldn't have bothered.

Having taken his models off his hands I left with a RO conversion (an old Chaos troll with rat-like features) that I'm loathe to use.

Icedman · Post by **Icedman** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 12:28 am

Did i miss something? When was it ruled that you didn't have to "activate" your WA?

I was pretty sure (can't find the email atm) that the ruling from BBRC is that you HAVE to use your WA first in every turn if you have him on the pitch. If i'm wrong, could someone point me in the direction of the ruling; it might make me take a Rat Ogre in my Skaven team...