NAF Stuff

    • Dear members,

      The time has come to begin the NAF Annual Review 2018!

      What is it?

      The Annual Review is the new method by which the NAF will set rules and guidelines for tournaments held over the next calendar year. It is our aim to reduce confusion, increase stability and make sure that our tournament rules and guidelines are fit for purpose in an exciting time for Blood Bowl.

      Each year, the NAF will discuss all Games Workshop rules releases since the prior review (for this, our first review, this document will serve as the starting point). We will also bianually review the NAF tournament sanctioning procedure during this process. Then, on November 1, we will release the NAF tournament rules for the coming year for feedback, becoming mandatory on January 1. These rules will remain static for a calendar year, increasing stability and reducing confusion for tournament organizers and attendees.

      Why are you doing this?

      Throughout GW’s gradual release of Blood Bowl’s latest edition (BB2016), the NAF had been reacting and updating tournament rules shortly after each new Deathzone supplement was published. While this approach allowed tournament organizers to quickly incorporate new game elements, it did have its drawbacks. It can take some time for new rules to be translated into different languages, leaving some members unclear on the mechanics of the new rules they are expected to play with. Members that don’t follow GW’s release cycle can be confused as to which rules have been mandated. As a main objective of the NAF’s sanctioning procedure is help its members feel secure in the consistency of the rules they’ll encounter at any tournament they choose to attend, such issues are problematic. The speed with which we have attempted to deliver updates has also provided little time for the NAF to consider community reaction to new rules before choosing whether to include them. With this in mind and considering community feedback, we felt a change of approach was necessary.

      What is going to happen?

      A forum has been set-up to facilitate discussion between the global staff and the approval team. This year, we’ll debate examples from tournament rulespacks we’ve seen of late and how they impact the NAF sanctioning document, as well as exploring feedback on the ongoing GW rules releases. All global NCs and some RCs from bigger nations have been invited, so wherever you are in the NAF world, you can feedback via your staff member and have your say on the topics mentioned. The outputs of this discussion will be considered by the committee, and then the 2019 tournament documents released on Nov. 1.

      The three documents you can expect to see published on Nov. 1 are the NAF tournament rules for the following year, an update to the NAF tournament team list and the NAF tournament sanctioning document, which is subject to biannual review.


      Q: If some rules arrive between Annual Reviews and I want to use them, can I?

      A: While the NAF rules will remain static for a calendar year, GW will continue to release new rules and new material. The NAF has always allowed tournament organizers leeway to include house-ruled star players or custom / thematic rules, and any new material from GW will be handled similarly. If you would like to include a new star or inducement yet to make it to the NAF rules, please ask.

      Q: Why not just incorporate rules as they arrive?

      A: As noted above, there has been membership feeback that this approach added to, rather than reduced, confusion in the tournament community. Therefore, the Annual Review is a community idea we’ve adopted to try and reduce this confusion. We have undertaken similar processes before when reviewing the sanction document, it’s just not been as advertised this widely previously. With BB2016 so far, the NAF has only omitted one rule (Piling On) from NAF tournaments, and that followed community feedback that in the niche NAF tournament world, the CRP rule is superior. Like any other BB league or group, the NAF is a ‘commissioner’ of sorts, and has a view on what works for our very specific purposes. Everything else so far has been included in the mandatory NAF tournament rules.

      Q: Can I expect much to change, should I be worried about a number of new NAF tournament conventions I will need to understand?

      A: No, not really. While we’re examining the sanction document, we feel like we should take a holistic approach and debate a wide number of topics, but life is pretty good in Blood Bowl right now! If something is not broken, we are unlikely to go fixing it. Think of this as a review and an update, rather than a ground-up re-write.