FORUM HOME > TNM > Discussion
Ruleset question

Perverted_IconPosted on 10/10/05 at 14:28:04

First time I've posted on the new board, as I've just gotten back into the TNM thing.  
Here's my question:  I'm doing a fed based on the Rick's old school rules.  My franchise guy (52 card) is the Rock.  (I know, really old school.)  Rock makes the finals of my Championship tournament, losing, and then comes up short in the rematch the next week.  I'm not booking it, by the way, though I wouldn't think that the Rock needs the belt to get over.  
I'm sure you know what happens now.  After the rematch where the Rock loses, he quits, effective immediately.
Now I'm wondering, do I replace him, work around it, or what?  Your franchise guy quitting nine weeks or so in is not the best situation.  
I'll probably just try to work around it and not add someone to the roster, but I haven't really looked to see if it will give me any problems.  
I'd be interested if there are any opinions on this or if this was covered in any subsequent printings of the ruleset.  Thanks.
Rick GarrardPosted on 10/10/05 at 15:22:22

It shouldn't effect you on future cards, except for one or two where it will ask for your "franchise" wrestler.  In that case, just substitute any other wrestler from your roster.  In fact the original rules were written based on a circuit where the franchise wrestler for the first year quit as well.

And just because the rules are labeled "old school" doesn't mean that you should only use stars from the 70s and 80s with them.  They got labeled such because I was developing them using my BCW circuit, and now my CW circuit, both of which used a lot of the older wrestlers.
americamamushiPosted on 10/10/05 at 20:21:40

And just because the rules are labeled "old school" doesn't mean that you should only use stars from the 70s and 80s with them.  They got labeled such because I was developing them using my BCW circuit, and now my CW circuit, both of which used a lot of the older wrestlers.
Are you sure you didn't label them "old school" as a rib on Mark Calloway? ;)
Perverted_IconPosted on 10/10/05 at 22:57:39

That's pretty much what I planned to do, Rick.  I'm going to have to change around some of my plans, of course, without my "franchise" guy, but it should be alright.
I guess I'll be having guys double dip every week now.
Thanks for the response.
Rick GarrardPosted on 10/11/05 at 04:16:42

one thing I do advise against... is using the same guy in more than one rule per week for the most part, or else he's more likely than not gonna end up fighting against himself at some point.  

And no... the "old school" name was thrust upon the ruleset by someone else, and I sorta ran with it.
HugeRockStar760Posted on 10/14/05 at 16:30:18

Just do what I do when I use Rick's Old School Rules. If you don't have anyone for a wrestler to match up against, or you want to avoid having a wrestler wrestle twice, just have a guy go up against a jobber. This way, he'll still be in the spotlight and he'll be put over someone guaranteed.
americamamushiPosted on 10/14/05 at 22:25:46

When i've had my franchise guy get injured or quit sometimes I'll just debut a new wrestler to take his place.
Rick GarrardPosted on 10/15/05 at 02:23:09

HugeRockStar... you have a great point.  It is the old school rules set... and jobber matches are indeed very old school.  So that, in my opinion, is a grand idea.