LRB 6.0

[Joemanji]

[information in this post deleted by request of GW legal]

Oh FFS.

[Wylder]

Anyone else get the impression that this means GW are trying to shitcan LRB6 entirely?

[PapyHarzen]

Anyone else get the impression that this means GW are trying to shitcan LRB6 entirely?

Think same.

The big "Bloodbowl World Cup" (Cyanide game) is organized with GW, it's upon LRB5 rules (Not complete but LRB5), it's during 2010, link for official rules is the link to GW page (If they get LRB6 it will be not the "good" rules in regard of Cyanid game)...

Papy

[PeteW]

So, let me get this straight. We have to use these rules for whenever we play BB now?
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/conte ... Id=4800003

Those are the only ones I can find on the GW site.

Until, they produce the LRB6 ones. And are they going to do this if Cyanide doesn't have them?

I'm not trying to be funny here, I just would like a simple answer.... or is that asking too much?

[tchatter]

Guys... keep in mind that the changes between LRB5.0+ and LRB6.0 are very minor. Any one of us can simply take our LRB5.0+ and pencil in the changes. Also, just because GW decides not to post the LRB6.0 PDF on their site doesn't mean that we can't make the house rules for tournaments or leagues or whatever we decide.

Remember Blood Bowl is "our" (the communities) game, it isn't GW's game anymore. The LRB6.0 is based on 3 years of playtesting and was created by the community not some "suits" at GW! Remember that. This is OUR GAME. If GW wants to take their ball and go home so be it. We just ignore them, and continue playing the game the way it was intended to be played by Jervis, the BBRC and the COMMUNITY. Eff GW.

Just because Cyanide is now "stuck" with LRB5.0+, which they truly aren't. The changes to make the game LRB6 could easily be patched in. Does NOT mean that we are "stuck".

Who cares about Cyanide??? They don't even have the full game yet. Besides BB is a Table Top, Face to Face miniatures game not a PC game.

I say give GW until the 1st of the year to post an Official PDF of LRB6.0 and if they don't... let the homemade LRB6.0's loose on the community. GW obviously has given up supporting this game over 3 years ago. We don't need them. Its time to take our game back and play it the way we want to.

[tchatter]

So, let me get this straight. We have to use these rules for whenever we play BB now?
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/conte ... Id=4800003
I'm not trying to be funny here, I just would like a simple answer.... or is that asking too much?

No. You do not have to use those rules. You can use whatever rules you and your opponent decide to use. LRB3, 4, 5 or 6. Hell go back to 3rd edition. You can play whatever you want.

Its not a simple answer because GW is a screwed up company. If they were smart they would have had all of this sorted out and minis for EVERY team and EVERY star in the works. They would have been prepared to re-release Blood Bowl at the same time the PC game was released. But GW isn't that smart.

The simple answer: Play BB the way you want to play it. If you want to play the game in the form that the creator, JJ and his BBRC intend... then play LRB6.0. If you want to play it some other way... go for it.

Just because GW are a bunch of idiots and may not post the LRB6.0 rules, doesn't mean that I can't organize a tournament whose rules are the LRB as posted on the GW site with the following house rules... those rules being the ones that would make it LRB6.0. What can they do?? NOTHING.

Its our game now... not theirs.

[Xtreme]

Remember Blood Bowl is "our" (the communities) game, it isn't GW's game anymore. The LRB6.0 is based on 3 years of playtesting and was created by the community not some "suits" at GW! Remember that. This is OUR GAME. If GW wants to take their ball and go home so be it. We just ignore them, and continue playing the game the way it was intended to be played by Jervis, the BBRC and the COMMUNITY. Eff GW.

Couldn't agree more.

[Joemanji]

In an ideal world, sure. In reality, we need the GW authorised version of the game to bring in new blood. Without new blood, BB will die. Can we risk alienating newcomers to the game by playing a version of the rules that they have never heard of and GW doesn't recognise?

[thechosengobbo]

In an ideal world, sure. In reality, we need the GW authorised version of the game to bring in new blood. Without new blood, BB will die. Can we risk alienating newcomers to the game by playing a version of the rules that they have never heard of and GW doesn't recognise?

Agreed. Not too happy about the fact, but agreed.

[Slinky]

In an ideal world, sure. In reality, we need the GW authorised version of the game to bring in new blood. Without new blood, BB will die. Can we risk alienating newcomers to the game by playing a version of the rules that they have never heard of and GW doesn't recognise?

Agreed. Not too happy about the fact, but agreed.

Lurker mode off.

Come on your two I've seen your posts and youa are both smarter than these statements.

How many leagues (and I know there are a lot of them) use LRB 5.0+. Where did they get that from? GW??? Heck no.

So if for the last full year so many leagues have been playing successfully with a version that cannot be found anywhere on GW's site why should we suddenly go "oh my GW says I cannot play a better version of Blood Bowl ... okay I won't".

If LRB 5.0+ made it through the community than LRB 6.0 will as well. Have some faith in the community that made LRB 6.0 that it can also make it work and bring in new players.

Need more proof. How many leagues and tournaments allow in the 3 new teams. Where are those hosted on the GW site?

This is the community's game. Don't drink the Kool-aid suddenly now that you can only buy the GW brand when we haven't for the last year.

We should not be forced to play a worse version of Blood Bowl because GW is acting a bit shitzoid at the moment.

[PapyHarzen]

How many leagues (and I know there are a lot of them) use LRB 5.0+. Where did they get that from? GW??? Heck no.
So if for the last full year so many leagues have been playing successfully with a version that cannot be found anywhere on GW's site why should we suddenly go "oh my GW says I cannot play a better version of Blood Bowl ... okay I won't".
If LRB 5.0+ made it through the community than LRB 6.0 will as well. Have some faith in the community that made LRB 6.0 that it can also make it work and bring in new players.
Need more proof. How many leagues and tournaments allow in the 3 new teams. Where are those hosted on the GW site?

Agree with that. New blood (in TT games) come from leagues, leagues play LRB5 + and new teams in my area, we are going to make a second tourney here in Britanny (Breizhbowl), it will be in LRB6 or 5+ but not in "just LRB5 GW official one ", it's our decision, our game.

This is the community's game. Don't drink the Kool-aid suddenly now that you can only buy the GW brand when we haven't for the last year.
We should not be forced to play a worse version of Blood Bowl because GW is acting a bit shitzoid at the moment.

YES!

Papy

[PeteW]

Okay.... so I only have old LRB5. Where can I get LRB5+ from?

[Dark_Soul]

Bollox to them - I'm sure there will be plenty of sites that will host LRB6 for long enough to get the word out. For example, I think those of us using Gmail get a certain amount we can design a site for (though I may be wrong, but I know we used to). Just set up a site with the pdf and link it on forums - nothing more needed.

[Wee Gobbo]

Well regardless of the result, I just want to know whats up from Galak. I mean the edit COULD be a good thing if you take into account the possible iminent release of LRB 6? Perhaps GW dont want the release to be a botch? Either way, regardless. new blood and BB, well, I got through to the tabletop via the video game and from the people in my local league it seems to make little difference what GW does, cancelling Lrb6 or not, people will play how they want it. Now all we have to do is for Galak to give us an update :s.

[GalakStarscraper]

Wee Gobbo,

I am no longer permitted to comment.

Galak