December NAF Minutes Facebooktwittergoogle_plusmail

NAF Committee – 4th December 2016

Present: All committee

Members of the NAF Committee are involved with rules on a personal basis from this point, though were not formally involved in the box or DZ1.

We have been given the spare 29mm boards from Warhammer World for use at our tournaments.

There was discussion that the NAF want to ensure that the existing membership is catered for and sure on the rules of the game, yet to accommodate, as much as possible, the likely expansion of the player-base with the re-released game.

It was noted that, with the exception of the 3 BBRC-agreed teams, the NAF has always used the Official Rules as published by GW. For the first time there will inevitably be a split if we rule that the remaining 47 star players and wizards are allowed or special play cards are not mandatory. As we believe that the community wish to use the remaining star players (as well as Slann) and have discretion on cards, there will be a split from the Official Rules.

We do have some responsibility for Leagues because various leagues will follow what the NAF does.

Nate will be publishing some guidelines that the Tournament Subcommittee has been working on providing more complete guidance for Tournament Organisers.

The NAF will publish a document in the next couple of weeks that explains what rules sanctioned NAF tournaments should follow from the 1st February 2017. The 3 month period previously mentioned was a maximum timescale.

These will be as follows:
– Box Set, Death Zone 1, Errata, FAQ, Teams of Legend, with the following changes:
o Slann should be used.
o Piling On should be in the rules pack and does not require a reroll.
o CRP Wizards may be used at TO discretion (as previously).
o The list of stars (where allowed by TOs) will include all CRP Stars and those released by GW at the Bugman’s Tournament (at their corrected costs).
o Cards do not have to be used. TO discretion regarding using the old ones, new ones, or neither. If the new ones are used there is the option of pricing the weaker deck at 50k and the stronger at 200k.

NB this means that 60k Human Catchers, Arguing the Call and Timberrrr should be used.

The Committee will reconvene to consider future rules changes.

Any Urgent Actions
Manuel and Torsten to contact all National Co-ordinators regarding trophies and gift distribution.

Officer Reports
To be made on the Committee forum.

Next Meeting
8th Jan, 2100 CET

Download PDF

9 thoughts on “December NAF Minutes

  1. hyperbolemur

    Seems odd to enforce a mandate on an optional rule. As the governing body, the NAF should aim to have everyone agree to the smallest possible core of standards and allow for liberty on non-important issues such as Piling On.

  2. Txapo

    A game belong to those who play it, has always been my anarchist opinion on the matter and still will be. So in the end we have 2 old rules coming back and one bashing rule being moderated but not. No revolution.

    Still is good that GW sees that they can’t enforce our organization as if we would be kids.

    What about Khorne and Bretonia? They are bound to apear soon,…

    1. Steve

      @Txapo – GW’s not trying to enforce anything – Death Zone is quite clear on the matter that leagues and tournaments can omit or add any rules as they see fit.

  3. Purplegoo

    I think it’s great that the NAF have tried to show a bit of guidance in a confusing time, and that it’s a good thing TOs have an official line to be going on with. I appreciate that we are in a fluid situation as the new edition drops in chunks, but I find myself thinking that the above is something of a mixed bag:

    • Stars, Slann and wizards – all fine and sensible. The ‘final’ position on stars and wizards is an unknown, so it makes sense for us to maintain the CRP rules plus Bugmans stars for now. As you were on Slann, great

    • Piling On – I find this to be a bit jarring and strange. Have the NAF ever vetoed a skill rewrite from a new edition before? PO is not a significant skill in tournament BB so it’s not a big deal, but I find the NAF house ruling against a new skill description to be odd. Would a tournament submitted with skills rewritten or borrowed from previous editions normally be sanctioned?

    • Cards – I was hoping that the NAF would show a bit of direction and leadership in this area, rather than leaving it entirely open. It might get confusing quickly if some events are using cards, some aren’t, some have changed the prices, some have not and the situation is entirely fluid week to week. I think it likely that existing TOs and members won’t use the cards and will understand the situation, but we’re likely to grow via an influx of new members pretty quickly. They will likely be more open to the rules as now written and more easily confused. I would have much preferred that the NAF had set a clear direction but left it open for TOs to explicitly and loudly make changes in their rulespacks, subject to the discretion of the TD. Sort of in the same way as some tournaments permit house ruled races

    Generally, I’m happy that we’re moving to an ‘agreed’ position, I just find a couple of the points there a little odd.

    1. sann0638 Post author

      Please change them to match the new set of rules. Get in touch with the Tournament Director if there’s a problem. The rule changes are very minor, so hopefully there won’t be.

Comments are closed.