BrookM wrote: Could you please take that discussion elsewhere already?
Discussion? That’s a far more polite and generous way of describing it than I would have chosen.
Anyhoo, I’m finding myself temporarily loosing interest in Necromunda simply because the stuff that’s available now is far less interesting to me than the things to come. I’m thinking my N17 excitement will come back with ten times the force once they get the (imho) boring old gangs out of the way and start releasing the guilds.
Yeah we played one test and didn’t even bother trying to start a campaign, no point with so few gangs. This feels like a soft launch with the actual game released towards the end of the year when all the gangs and Gang War books are out so we can start doing campaigns for real. Probably won’t be playing it at all until then. Sadly, because I was insanely hyped before release.
Love the GSC miniatures so I welcome them as a new playable force! I just hope they plan to include these rules in GW3. Its bad enough to be carrying around 3-4 rulebooks to play the game, I'm not interested in adding old magazines to the pile.
If it ends up anything like Blood Bowl we'll get an almanac at the end of the year with all the books and magazine articles compiled into a single volume (and I'm sure GW won't be able to resist double dipping). I expect that will be followed with more gang war books next year (or maybe guild war), that include rules for new the factions and maybe some of the other settings they talked about.
New GSC tactics cards in WD was probably too much to hope for. I've only played 3 games of N17 so far but I'm not convinced that lack of non-generic, gang-specific cards will doom a gang to failure. GSC tactics cards would be nice though.
They could have a lot of fun with GSC tactics cards... fingers crossed they might out out a 'supplemental gangs pack', covering the three gangs that will feature in WD.
Web Pistol and Bolt Pistol are missing. Power Pick can't be taken by the leader, despite the model being able to take it. Little weird IMO.
Baxx wrote: Nice to finally have the rules for Rending. Kind of sleazy of GW to only release it through another paid content.
It's not 'sleazy'. It not being in GW2 was a mistake.
Or, to put it another way, never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence (or rather, in this case, a lack of proof reading). I mean, do you honestly think they purposefully didn't include rending because they were going to put it in a WD article???
They most likely kept GSC out due to page count. Some lower end printers will print things in multiples of 4, while big printers want books to be in multiples of 16. If you try and have a different amount or pages, it can raise the cost of printing something a lot, or you will have to have a bunch of blank pages in the back. GW2 is 48 pages, or 16x3. So that's probably what happened. If they added another 16 pages, it would prolly be a $50 book.
Glad they added GSC though, even though it's just WD. Better than not at all
Yep, was always meant to be in white dwarf and is the first of three White Dwarf exclusive gangs (I am sure they will be in the Gang War Compendium as well though).
They also mentioned that a fuller and different style of GSC gang may appear when they cover the Genestealer infected hive later on (the White Dwarf article covers an infected group of miners).
The rules are a bit more bland than I would have liked. But hey, at least they gives us some much needed diversity
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Necros wrote: They most likely kept GSC out due to page count. Some lower end printers will print things in multiples of 4, while big printers want books to be in multiples of 16. If you try and have a different amount or pages, it can raise the cost of printing something a lot, or you will have to have a bunch of blank pages in the back. GW2 is 48 pages, or 16x3. So that's probably what happened. If they added another 16 pages, it would prolly be a $50 book.
Glad they added GSC though, even though it's just WD. Better than not at all
No, it was always meant to be a WD exclusive. As you can see with the lack of tactical cards and dices, they never intended to give GSC the same support as the other factions
Baxx wrote: I bought the book, they haven't given it to me for free. So far, only way of getting is it to pay for the magazine.
So, aside from thinking there are 16 different 'versions' of Necromunda, you truly believe that GW intentionally left the rending rule out of GW2 and put it into these Genestealer Cult rules to get some more money out of you?
streetsamurai wrote: No, it was always meant to be a WD exclusive. As you can see with the lack of tactical cards and dices, they never intended to give GSC the same support as the other factions
That'd be kind of an odd thing for Forge World to do, considering they've repeatedly said they wanted to explore the other hives of Necromunda. An article, which was released today, specifically mentioned Genestealer-infested Hive Seconuds. And at the Hours Heresy/Neomunda weekender, there were rumors posted saying that there would be a Gensetealer Cult sprue specifically designed to work the Orlock bodies and weapons. It's more likely that they're waiting to get all of the House gangs (and possibly the Palatine Enforcers), before turning to the other Hives and possibly doing a series of Index Armour-like books for the other hives.
GSC are pretty bad. Adept and Acolyte are short range focused but they're not very tanky, or killy.
Acolyte with 1 W, 1A, no access to wargear meant they can't get extra arm, and all of other useful juice.
Same for aberrant, no armor and no wargear meant they become a duck for any shotgun hunter to take down. They're also very expensive.
On the plus side, Neophyte ganger are good, with 5+ Cl and mass auto/las/shot gun in first game your best bet will be trying to potshot Leader/Champ and cripple their economy.
Also lot of typo, needle pistol still S4.
"Web" rule is also confusing. I assume the +1 for capture apply for "OOA ganger that was coup de grace while webbed"
I can't wait for the rules to be finished, edited and published as one book.
Looking at what, 2020?
Aeneades wrote: Yep, was always meant to be in white dwarf and is the first of three White Dwarf exclusive gangs (I am sure they will be in the Gang War Compendium as well though).
They also mentioned that a fuller and different style of GSC gang may appear when they cover the Genestealer infected hive later on (the White Dwarf article covers an infected group of miners).
Chopstick wrote: GSC are pretty bad. Adept and Acolyte are short range focused but they're not very tanky, or killy.
Acolyte with 1 W, 1A, no access to wargear meant they can't get extra arm, and all of other useful juice.
Same for aberrant, no armor and no wargear meant they become a duck for any shotgun hunter to take down. They're also very expensive.
On the plus side, Neophyte ganger are good, with 5+ Cl and mass auto/las/shot gun in first game your best bet will be trying to potshot Leader/Champ and cripple their economy.
I'm still really happy. The figs I got in Overkill are now usable in four different games.
Chopstick wrote: Needle weapon are S5 and D1 in GW2, they copy the needle weapon profile straight from GW1 , which also explained why it is missing the Damage value.
Acolyte with 1 W, 1A, no access to wargear meant they can't get extra arm, and all of other useful juice.
Same for aberrant, no armor and no wargear meant they become a duck for any shotgun hunter to take down. They're also very expensive.
Since the description of the third arm mention unwieldy and heavy weapons, we can safely assume that this is a typo, at least for the acolytes and neophytes. Furthermore, the description of the cult icon speciffically says that only an acolyte can take one.
Same for the hazard suit, that must be taken, according to the unit description, but is only in wargear section.
So RAI, you can take wargear for the acolytes and neophytes. I still have some doubt about the aberrants, but not for the two others.
So... the guys who actually have three arms cannot purchase them, as they do not have access to the Wargear section. Also, despite being this gang's equivalent of Champions, they come with W1 and A1, unlike all the others.
Sure. That makes sense.
[EDIT]: If I had to guess, I'd say this is a classic case of 'can't see the woods for the trees'. To the person writing this the very notion that an Acolyte wouldn't automatically have 3 arms (or more!) never entered his mind, as such no access to the Wargear list was given, as why would they need to buy anything from there? They come with a Hazard Suit already, and there's no way an mutated monster like a Genestealer Acolyte could ever get something resembling a photovisor or a respirator, and they already have 3 arms, so why give them the option. Then, safe in the knowledge that Acolytes had 3 arms because they always have three arms (except when they have four), he... forgot to give them 3 arms in their basic starting equipment. Oops.
Or a second wound. Or a second attack.
Or Bolt Pistols, Web Pistols or leader access to Power Picks.
We shouldn't be able to find such obvious problems on our first read-throughs. I mean honestly....
My issue is the Movement 4". I don't recall anything in Genestealer Cult, Cult of the Warmason or any other book that paints the cult as being anything other than quick in some cases and normal human speed in most others.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So... the guys who actually have three arms cannot purchase them, as they do not have access to the Wargear section. Also, despite being this gang's equivalent of Champions, they come with W1 and A1, unlike all the others.
Sure. That makes sense.
[EDIT]: If I had to guess, I'd say this is a classic case of 'can't see the woods for the trees'. To the person writing this the very notion that an Acolyte wouldn't automatically have 3 arms (or more!) never entered his mind, as such no access to the Wargear list was given, as why would they need to buy anything from there? They come with a Hazard Suit already, and there's no way an mutated monster like a Genestealer Acolyte could ever get something resembling a photovisor or a respirator, and they already have 3 arms, so why give them the option. Then, safe in the knowledge that Acolytes had 3 arms because they always have three arms (except when they have four), he... forgot to give them 3 arms in their basic starting equipment. Oops.
Or a second wound. Or a second attack.
Or Bolt Pistols, Web Pistols or leader access to Power Picks.
We shouldn't be able to find such obvious problems on our first read-throughs. I mean honestly....
Ugh, sounds like a total mess. Shan't be buying this either! Nucromunda has really killed my Necromunda enthusiasm. I have nonwish to buy 19 books and 3 White Dwarfs, all as badly proofed and edited as my 40KFW Index.
Baxx wrote: I bought the book, they haven't given it to me for free. So far, only way of getting is it to pay for the magazine.
So, aside from thinking there are 16 different 'versions' of Necromunda, you truly believe that GW intentionally left the rending rule out of GW2 and put it into these Genestealer Cult rules to get some more money out of you?
You actually think this was intentional?
When did I say there are 16 different versions? There are 3 systems to play, that's a fact. You got a vendetta against me or something? It seems personal. You think I'm the only one saying this? Not a single person questioned the same things said by many other peoples over at yaktribe. They identified the different systems before me. They mentioned you had to pay for the missing rule of GW2 before me. Nobody there is fighting tooth and nail over it.
Baxx wrote: I bought the book, they haven't given it to me for free. So far, only way of getting is it to pay for the magazine.
So, aside from thinking there are 16 different 'versions' of Necromunda, you truly believe that GW intentionally left the rending rule out of GW2 and put it into these Genestealer Cult rules to get some more money out of you?
You actually think this was intentional?
When did I say there are 16 different versions? There are 3 systems to play, that's a fact. You got a vendetta against me or something? It seems personal. You think I'm the only one saying this? Not a single person questioned the same things said by many other peoples over at yaktribe. They identified the different systems before me. They mentioned you had to pay for the missing rule of GW2 before me. Nobody there is fighting tooth and nail over it.
YakTribe is that rarest of oases where polite discussion is possible without people polarising and antagonising. It's a great forum.
Baxx wrote: When did I say there are 16 different versions? There are 3 systems to play, that's a fact. You got a vendetta against me or something? It seems personal. You think I'm the only one saying this? Not a single person questioned the same things said by many other peoples over at yaktribe. They identified the different systems before me. They mentioned you had to pay for the missing rule of GW2 before me. Nobody there is fighting tooth and nail over it.
Are you always this literal? Have you never heard of Internet Hyperbole, or are you just avoiding answering the question:
Do you truly believe that GW intentionally left the rending rule out of GW2 and put it into these Genestealer Cult rules to get some more money out of you?
The facts are: Gang War 2 is missing the rule. The only way to get the rule is through another paid content. In my eyes, that is sleazy. Should GW release a pdf where it is included, the problem is solved. So far they have not done that. That's all I got to add.
As written, no they can't. No access to wargear, and they don't start with an extra arm (which I believe was the likely intent).
Baxx wrote: The facts are: Gang War 2 is missing the rule. The only way to get the rule is through another paid content. In my eyes, that is sleazy. Should GW release a pdf where it is included, the problem is solved. So far they have not done that. That's all I got to add.
Sleazy implies that it was their intent to do that. Do you think they intended that?
Baxx wrote: The facts are: Gang War 2 is missing the rule. The only way to get the rule is through another paid content. In my eyes, that is sleazy. Should GW release a pdf where it is included, the problem is solved. So far they have not done that. That's all I got to add.
Sleazy implies that it was their intent to do that. Do you think they intended that?
Dude, no-one but you cares. Stop needling the guy over something utterly irrelevant! Go have a PM chat or start a thread!
But will that FAQ cover the Genestealer Cults, Chaos Cults and Bounty Hunter gangs? We know they're written. The delay was waiting for the WD team to find a slot for them.
H.B.M.C. wrote: As written, no they can't. No access to wargear, and they don't start with an extra arm (which I believe was the likely intent).
Agree that was probably the intent...extra arm to go with the 4 weapon allowance. They clearly put effort into creating all the necessary options so that folks could use Magus and Primus models if they choose, so it's weird that Acolytes wouldn't be WYSIWYG.
Anyhoo, I'm definitely running these guys in our campaign. They may not seem great on paper, but I've heard that before in other GW skirmish games and done well.
So what's the current consensus on Necromunda? I have resisted buying it so far. I'm keen to do skirmish gaming in 40K but can currently do that with SW:A. I love Genestealer Cultists and had been planning on picking up this month's WD and also the base game... but I'm somewhat put off.
Do I...
1) Buy all the existing Necromunda17 stuff and try to puzzle out what it all means.
2) Just play SW: A instead.
3) Just buy the core box and this month's WD and have three gangs.
4) Wait a year or two till they release a rules compilation.
5) Wait, possibly forever, till they release a rules compilation that doesn't immediately need twenty pages of errata.
It's fun to play, but the constant errors just drag it down, which is disappointing because at it's core it's pretty good but there's several things that keep it "average"
At the moment I'm intending to wait until they produce some sort of errata document before I buy anything else for Necromunda. Whether that resolve will last the distance is unclear.
They may produce a rules compilation in a year or so but, there's no guarantee that it'll be error free either.
The core rules of the game are mostly sound, so buy it if you fancy playing the cultists.
Ian Sturrock wrote: So what's the current consensus on Necromunda? I have resisted buying it so far. I'm keen to do skirmish gaming in 40K but can currently do that with SW:A. I love Genestealer Cultists and had been planning on picking up this month's WD and also the base game... but I'm somewhat put off.
Do I...
1) Buy all the existing Necromunda17 stuff and try to puzzle out what it all means.
2) Just play SW: A instead.
3) Just buy the core box and this month's WD and have three gangs.
4) Wait a year or two till they release a rules compilation.
5) Wait, possibly forever, till they release a rules compilation that doesn't immediately need twenty pages of errata.
My advice would be the following:
If you like Necromunda a lot then go over to yaktribe and see how they solved all the issues with the rules. GW is just not capable of writing a good ruleset and will not even correct former mistakes in their current new publication (GW2). Even the few GSC rules in the future WD are not free of any errors.
Otherwise don´t bother with it. The rules are akin to a carpet riddled with holes and GW is selling this item at a premium price.
1) Buy all the existing Necromunda17 stuff and try to puzzle out what it all means.
2) Just play SW: A instead.
3) Just buy the core box and this month's WD and have three gangs.
4) Wait a year or two till they release a rules compilation.
5) Wait, possibly forever, till they release a rules compilation that doesn't immediately need twenty pages of errata.
There's been fan projects to get the rules issues sorted out and make something like a fan made necromunda rules transcript already. I think there's a thread about it in the necromunda sub reddit somewhere If not google search.
The game play rocks. At first I was put off by the 2d zone mortalis thing and having to pay extra for the campaign rules and 3d terrain rules, but now I prefer the zone mortalis way of playing.
The gameplay is great... it’s just obscured by 1) very poorly laid out rules (even just within the core rules) 2) split into several different books 3) with poor quality control. It’s a shame because the actual game and the models are brilliant.
Ian Sturrock wrote: So what's the current consensus on Necromunda? I have resisted buying it so far. I'm keen to do skirmish gaming in 40K but can currently do that with SW:A. I love Genestealer Cultists and had been planning on picking up this month's WD and also the base game... but I'm somewhat put off.
If you pay attention to the internet, there's a LOT of griping about a comparatively small number of issues. Campaigns, admittedly, are kind of a mess, but the ruleset appears to have been written for skirmishes primarily. N17, as it's called on YakTribe, is not a game for tournaments, but it plays really well among friends and reasonable gamers out to have a good time.
Over time, the campaign situation will improve as the community comes up with "patches" and "mods" for the most problematic parts. There's already a project to create a handbook of sorts for campaigns, but it's effectively on pause until the FAQ finally drops and players gain more experience with the game.
Do we have any inkling about when the weapon packs will be coming out?
FerociousBeast wrote: N17, as it's called on YakTribe, is not a game for tournaments, but it plays really well among friends and reasonable gamers out to have a good time.
Necromunda has always been about that.
FerociousBeast wrote: Over time, the campaign situation will improve as the community comes up with "patches" and "mods" for the most problematic parts.
I don't want the 'community' to fix the rules. I want the rules to be fixed prior to release. These sorts of mistakes (just missing rules FFS) are obvious.
Ian Sturrock wrote: So what's the current consensus on Necromunda? I have resisted buying it so far. I'm keen to do skirmish gaming in 40K but can currently do that with SW:A. I love Genestealer Cultists and had been planning on picking up this month's WD and also the base game... but I'm somewhat put off.
If you pay attention to the internet, there's a LOT of griping about a comparatively small number of issues. Campaigns, admittedly, are kind of a mess, but the ruleset appears to have been written for skirmishes primarily. N17, as it's called on YakTribe, is not a game for tournaments, but it plays really well among friends and reasonable gamers out to have a good time.
Over time, the campaign situation will improve as the community comes up with "patches" and "mods" for the most problematic parts. There's already a project to create a handbook of sorts for campaigns, but it's effectively on pause until the FAQ finally drops and players gain more experience with the game.
Yeah, while fewer issues would be better, I'm less inclined to get bothered by them with NM since it's a game that's going to be played within existing groups. Mordheim was pretty solid overall, but had its issues and imbalances. So our group simply houseruled them, and we had fun with that game for years. NM has a very different audience than Shadespire, or even Blood Bowl.
Also, things like boneswords and saws are even less aggravating to me just because the intent is so clear (+1, -1).
Still, even though it's FW (who doesn't like to do the FAQ thing), I'm sure we'll get answers for a lot of things soon enough since the game is sold through GW.
All these errors and uselessly slow release dates prove to me that GW treats this as nothing more than "quick nostalgia bucks". Pretty sad considering Necromunda was a legit opportunity to make a decent game. Only GW can get so much sympathy for utterly failing on a reboot.
Ian Sturrock wrote: So what's the current consensus on Necromunda? I have resisted buying it so far. I'm keen to do skirmish gaming in 40K but can currently do that with SW:A. I love Genestealer Cultists and had been planning on picking up this month's WD and also the base game... but I'm somewhat put off.
Do I...
1) Buy all the existing Necromunda17 stuff and try to puzzle out what it all means.
2) Just play SW: A instead.
3) Just buy the core box and this month's WD and have three gangs.
4) Wait a year or two till they release a rules compilation.
5) Wait, possibly forever, till they release a rules compilation that doesn't immediately need twenty pages of errata.
Honestly any of your options are there for you. Personally, if you have Veteran players, you can work out the hiccups. Necromunda has been and always will be a players game. Rules are available online, and other people have said, the issues break down in the Proofreading/ playtesting. You can do well by just playing, finding your specific issues, and making a list of the ones you come across.
I really don't get the folks who give a free pass on the rules issues... the ones who say 'fix it yourself'.
First, please PM your emails, I want you as clients lol.
Second, whether or not some (but not all) can easily fix them is irrelevant, the point is whether you should be put in that position by a product you just shelled out for. The answer is no. Even if you don't mind, the answer is still no. Any business, employee, customer (hell even friends) anyone bearing any responsibility to hold up part of a deal/exchange with clear terms doesn't get a free pass, they are expected to hold up their end. Big deal or not. You can as an individual decide you don't care, but it is ludicrous to expect the mass of other customers to accede to your take on it and have no recourse to their own opinion.
Some people wouldn't have an easy time 'fixing' the rules themselves. Some people don't want to. Their right to expect what was promised, the terms of the deal, trumps your right to be ambivalent at being screwed, however minor it may be.
lol, sure, a few people missing one leg might not mind they only got one shoe in the box that was supposed to have a pair in it, but it is patently ridiculous for the one footed to say the two footed should just suck it up lol.
I personally am relying on Dakka, Yaktribe and Reddit posts to find my 'fixes'. I can deal with it. Still think N17 is a solid, fun game. I would never tell others they didn't have the right to be upset at this undeniably poor editing and community contact regarding FAQs.
MajorTom11 wrote: I really don't get the folks who give a free pass on the rules issues... the ones who say 'fix it yourself'.
First, please PM your emails, I want you as clients lol.
Second, whether or not some (but not all) can easily fix them is irrelevant, the point is whether you should be put in that position by a product you just shelled out for. The answer is no. Even if you don't mind, the answer is still no. Any business, and employee, anyone bearing any responsibility to hold up part of a deal doesn't get a free pass, they are expected to hold up their end. Big deal or not. You can as an individual decide you don't care, but it is ludicrous to expect the mass of other customers to accede to your take on it and have no recourse to their own opinion.
Some people wouldn't have an easy time 'fixing' the rules themselves. Some people don't want to. Their right to expect more trumps your right to be ambivalent.
lol, sure, a few people missing one leg might not mind they only got one shoe in the box that was supposed to have a pair in it, but it is patently ridiculous for the one footed to say the two footed should just suck it up lol.
I personally am relying on Dakka, Yaktribe and Reddit posts to find my 'fixes'. I can deal with it. Still think N17 is a solid, fun game. I would never tell others they didn't have the right to be upset at this undeniably poor editing and community contact regarding FAQs.
At first, I thought that you were serious...
The game is easily adaptable with a conversation if the issues are THAT pronounced, and game group common sense comes to the table with either a vote, a note, or easy discussion. Honestly I have not found an issue yet that a consensus between the group could deal with. There is no reason for someone to be so anal retentive that they have to write EVERY little nuance down, especially on a game like Necromunda, where you individualize each fighter, and make your own victories on what your gangs bring to the table.
Necromunda has always had issues, from the fabled Sustained fire in Overwatch, to the skill list, to the expansions AFTER a gang evolves to the point of well past a full on squad of Veteran Space marines. As a Player, you develop a game tempo depending on your group. Necromunda has always been a players game. If you come across something Wonkey, you deal with it, make a note, and drive on.
"Are there issues with the Proofreading", is a basic question, and the answer is yeah, there are issues, but if you are going to make that a hang up, obviously you haven't played GW games before. You handle it by writing down the issue, sending it back in to the company, or making it known to other players, so it gets attention. 3rd Arm- I recommend ignoring it, and playing as is. "Of course you have a 3rd arm, Go ahead and use the Scavey rules for 3rd arm." You have to remember, Back in the beginning, we all had to write our own rules for units and figures. As to complaining about price- We'll just go ahead and say NO. You can either pay the price, and get what you get, or don't.
I have yet to see a perfect GW game, with all rules squared away, all misspellings, all issues accounted for as far as game mechanics, weapons, and structure. Until then, you do what everyone does and play with what you have, make a note of it, and deal with it.
I was being serious. Your position is untenable, as it is based on the idea that everyone must think as you do in order to be valid. As mentioned, I actually agree with your overall personally. But that's not the point. The point is that although you and I may be able to get around it easily enough, some have a harder time, some are 'anal retentive' about the rules and that's how they like it, some just don't want to. Their positions are just as valid as ours, and their lack of acceptance of GW's plainly lackluster edit and FAQ process is also entirely valid.
You know that not everyone feels the exact same way as you do about it... right?
The game should be 100% playable without having players resort to "fixing" it themselves. Time and time again it seems like only GW gets a free pass on solid game design and execution because of the nerdgasms on new models (or offering old awful looking metal models for 2x the cost).
It's funny watching the community here blame GW for forgeworlds mistakes.
Wierd position to take, especially since I'm sure you all don't give GW any credit for the Horus Heresy rules.
FW messes up all the time on rules, or even just basic formatting. I'm literally doubting that many of you have opened a BRB from them. They're not always horrible, but sometimes they're pretty bad.
Necromunda's about consistent. That is to say; you all need to leverage your expectations. I'd feel different if FW didn't have a track record for this kinda stuff.
But they do. Still remember when my Blood Angel 30k dreadnoughts could take 37 Assault cannons.
Also, for those 'outraged' at the GSC cult rules, I wouldn't worry too much since these are just placeholder rules. House rule it for now, move on and enjoy the game.
Well its the specialist games team, a separate branch of FW. They are I believe the smallest team working on 40k/GW universe models. They probably work under tighter deadlines with less playtesting, editing etc. I don't feel like it should be up to me to fix what shouldn't be screwed up. Especially when i'm paying top dollar for the rules. It makes how FFG is handling the Legion ruleset seem like a godsend. A free PDF ruleset that can be updated/faq'd and can be fixed and then reuploaded..all I have to do is print it out and staple the thing together. The only hassle i'm going to endure is refilling my printer ink cartridges.
If you ask me the core Necromunda rules (underhive included) should have been free and handled just like the AoS and 40k core rules. GW/FW are failing to modernize and change with the times, and i'm not going to enable the behavior by giving them money for rules that are so poorly written. This definitely feels like a nostalgia cashgrab. They had better step up their game and I hope they get a lot of negativity in public view for this.
Neronoxx wrote: It's funny watching the community here blame GW for forgeworlds mistakes.
Wierd position to take, especially since I'm sure you all don't give GW any credit for the Horus Heresy rules.
Who cares? A mistake is a mistake. FW is part of GW proper. The terminology used (GW or FW) makes not a lick of difference to the problems with the rules.
Neronoxx wrote: FW messes up all the time on rules, or even just basic formatting. I'm literally doubting that many of you have opened a BRB from them. They're not always horrible, but sometimes they're pretty bad.
I own basically every Imperial Armour book ever printed. I know how good they are at producing books full of holes (Taros anyone?). Again, none of this negates the problems with Necromunda's current rules, so what exactly are you trying to say?
Neronoxx wrote: Necromunda's about consistent. That is to say; you all need to leverage your expectations. I'd feel different if FW didn't have a track record for this kinda stuff. But they do. Still remember when my Blood Angel 30k dreadnoughts could take 37 Assault cannons.
My expectation is a complete product, fit for purpose. Showing a track record of fething it up does not give them leeway to not improve.
Neronoxx wrote: Also, for those 'outraged' at the GSC cult rules, I wouldn't worry too much since these are just placeholder rules. House rule it for now, move on and enjoy the game.
1. We're not 'outraged', we're disappointed that yet another set of rules has come out with obvious mistakes that many of us found on our first skim read.
2. Place holder 'til what? Hive Secondus? Not good enough. These are the Necromunda Underhive Genestealer Cult rules. They are not fit for purpose on first printing. They are functionally broken in parts, and bafflingly incomplete in others.
3. As already stated 'just house rule it' is not a justification for shoddy rules writing. We shouldn't have to house rule bad rules.
Totally disappointed with how lazy this has been. N17 deserves better. It's such a good game! Had a single person other than the author tried to take the GSC article and make a gang where what they have matches their miniatures, all the issues would have been spotted.
If no one but the author even statted up a gang, should I believe it was actually playtested? The guy who wrote it playing against himself once maybe?
I love that pictures of these article pages are showing up early enough that I can decide in advance to buy or not rather than taking my chances.
I want to play Necromunda. So, when something is published with errors or typos, I have a few options:
1) Don't play because the game is wrong. This is not an acceptable option.
2) Wait for an official errata. OK in the long term, but I want to play now.
3) House-rule things and play the game, and contact GW and request a correction. This is the best solution, because it involves playing games. Yes, GWshould have done it right in the first place, but that's irrelevant because I can only play with what is written, not what should be.
Neronoxx wrote: It's funny watching the community here blame GW for forgeworlds mistakes.
Wierd position to take, especially since I'm sure you all don't give GW any credit for the Horus Heresy rules.
FW messes up all the time on rules, or even just basic formatting. I'm literally doubting that many of you have opened a BRB from them. They're not always horrible, but sometimes they're pretty bad.
Necromunda's about consistent. That is to say; you all need to leverage your expectations. I'd feel different if FW didn't have a track record for this kinda stuff.
But they do. Still remember when my Blood Angel 30k dreadnoughts could take 37 Assault cannons.
Also, for those 'outraged' at the GSC cult rules, I wouldn't worry too much since these are just placeholder rules. House rule it for now, move on and enjoy the game.
I don't really care what deparment made the rules, when I blame 'GW', isn't that the label on the box and books?
What does Horus Heresy have to do with all this? What is a 'BRB'?
I played Necromunda since the 90s, stopped playing 40k 10 years ago. I came back to GW (or Forgeworld if you will) in 2016 because of Blood Bowl. Now I'm back again because of Necromunda. I pay a price which should be sufficient to get rules without these bugs. But I don't really care about the price or how many books or articles they make. As long as I don't have to make up my own rules. I don't play that many miniature games so I can afford going all in on this one.
3) House-rule things and play the game, and contact GW and request a correction. This is the best solution, because it involves playing games. Yes, GWshould have done it right in the first place, but that's irrelevant because I can only play with what is written, not what should be.
I agree, waiting is not an option for me. I buy everything, gather all rules as they are released into a single document and try to fix the missing rules, inconsistencies, unclear rules and unbalanced rules from there. While I do like to sort out inconsistencies and collect rules into a document, I don't like to change balance or make rules for missing rules. I'm not good at game design and making rules myself.
Kanluwen wrote: The part that I don't get about people being so pissy over is that since day one, GW made it clear we were getting a "Compilation" book like Blood Bowl got.
Why would any individuals be buying the books piecemeal when it could be considered a league/club cost instead?
Out of interest, Kan, where did they make this clear? I don't recall seeing anything around the initial release about a Compendium/Annual.
Admittedly, I could have inferred it from their (also poor) treatment of the Blood Bowl community by releasing the two Death Zone books, followed by springing an Annual on them.
Alltlhough they released a compendium the same year after Death Zone 1 & 2 + weather tables and WD articles, the rules were at least a lot more tight and there's been multiple FAQ much faster than for Necromunda. Seems like they gave more respect to the NAF community than the Necromunda counterpart(s) (yaktribe?). Sure, they didn't change much of the core game in Blood Bowl, but they added a ton of new (optional) content. I don't remember a whole lot of problems that occoured because of it.
BB is, for better or worse, a competitive game. Necro is something you play with your friends. I'm guessing that might have been a consideration as far as FAQ timings are concerned.
I want to play Necromunda. So, when something is published with errors or typos, I have a few options:
1) Don't play because the game is wrong. This is not an acceptable option.
2) Wait for an official errata. OK in the long term, but I want to play now.
3) House-rule things and play the game, and contact GW and request a correction. This is the best solution, because it involves playing games. Yes, GWshould have done it right in the first place, but that's irrelevant because I can only play with what is written, not what should be.
You missed an option - 4) Ignore the whole sorry mess and play one of the multiple free, fully-functional, feature-complete versions of Necromunda that already exist until GW get their gak together, and if you're super desperate for it just house rule in alternate activation.
Which is what house ruling is *supposed* to be about, by the way; preference, the choice to interpret or reinterpret or add a rule to suit your group's tastes and opinions. It is absolutely not and never was about having to basically rewrite the rules to even make them functional. People keep bringing up Mordheim as if it and N17 are even remotely comparable, and that's a complete joke. Mordheim's commonly accepted house rules are things like lowering the price of armour to make it more worthwhile, or adding an extra penalty to Slings to make spamming them less viable, or various tweaks designed to put 2-handed and sword & board loadouts on the same level as dual-wielding without requiring a bunch of skills first. Those are all preferences, not requirements, the game will function perfectly well out of the box. None of the official warbands are literally broken, in that they cannot access core parts of their own equipment. None of the rules are bloody missing. EDIT: In fact, thinking about the GSC rules specifically - I recall pretty much fan made rules for Mordheim warbands published in Town Crier/Fanatic that were in a better state than these "official" ones. It's a joke, and not in the hahafunny sense.
Every time something comes out for N17, my decision to wait for a hopefully properly FAQ'd & errata'd compilation book and just focus on the models I like(which so far, alas for my wallet, is all of them) seems to me like a better and better idea, and that's not good, by this point I should be regretting that choice, I should be dropping other projects to get my warband/s finished and buying up all the rules, but instead of fixing them and winning me and others with a similar lack of tolerance for "flatpack rules" over, they've managed to double-down.
And for the people pushing the "nya, it's FW, stop saying GW it's FW, nya" thing - like banjo it is. The SG team isn't getting their deadlines, resource allocation, and business model from FW, I will happily bet a tenner on that. The state of N17 is as much FW's fault as the shonky FW Indexes were - FW stuff is rarely perfect, granted, but they only tend to cock up spectacularly when GW put them under massive time pressure.
I want to play Necromunda. So, when something is published with errors or typos, I have a few options:
1) Don't play because the game is wrong. This is not an acceptable option.
2) Wait for an official errata. OK in the long term, but I want to play now.
3) House-rule things and play the game, and contact GW and request a correction. This is the best solution, because it involves playing games. Yes, GWshould have done it right in the first place, but that's irrelevant because I can only play with what is written, not what should be.
You missed an option - 4) Ignore the whole sorry mess and play one of the multiple free, fully-functional, feature-complete versions of Necromunda that already exist until GW get their gak together, and if you're super desperate for it just house rule in alternate activation.
I prefer the new version, so option 4 isn't acceptable either. House-ruling errata is quicker and easier than house-ruling the fundamentals of the previous game (not just alternative activation, but the whole actions system), so I'll do the former rather than the latter.
Kanluwen wrote: The part that I don't get about people being so pissy over is that since day one, GW made it clear we were getting a "Compilation" book like Blood Bowl got.
Why would any individuals be buying the books piecemeal when it could be considered a league/club cost instead?
Out of interest, Kan, where did they make this clear? I don't recall seeing anything around the initial release about a Compendium/Annual.
Admittedly, I could have inferred it from their (also poor) treatment of the Blood Bowl community by releasing the two Death Zone books, followed by springing an Annual on them.
I’d like to know that too.
Besides what your saying would make GW think “look, we’ve been right all these years, no one is buying it so let’s mothball Necromunda for another 25years.”
Besides what your saying would make GW think “look, we’ve been right all these years, no one is buying it so let’s mothball Necromunda for another 25years.”
That's the only thing at the moment that's making me consider buying Gang War 2. I want them to keep producing something Necromunda related, not can it again. At least I'll be able to use the models, even if I switch back to the old rules (or more likely create a hybrid of the two).
I want to play Necromunda. So, when something is published with errors or typos, I have a few options:
1) Don't play because the game is wrong. This is not an acceptable option.
2) Wait for an official errata. OK in the long term, but I want to play now.
3) House-rule things and play the game, and contact GW and request a correction. This is the best solution, because it involves playing games. Yes, GWshould have done it right in the first place, but that's irrelevant because I can only play with what is written, not what should be.
You missed an option - 4) Ignore the whole sorry mess and play one of the multiple free, fully-functional, feature-complete versions of Necromunda that already exist until GW get their gak together, and if you're super desperate for it just house rule in alternate activation.
I prefer the new version, so option 4 isn't acceptable either. House-ruling errata is quicker and easier than house-ruling the fundamentals of the previous game (not just alternative activation, but the whole actions system), so I'll do the former rather than the latter.
Yup, option 4 is essentially use another houseruled set of rules with glaring problems over using a better fundamental set of rules that need a few minor fixes.
I want to play Necromunda. So, when something is published with errors or typos, I have a few options:
1) Don't play because the game is wrong. This is not an acceptable option.
2) Wait for an official errata. OK in the long term, but I want to play now.
3) House-rule things and play the game, and contact GW and request a correction. This is the best solution, because it involves playing games. Yes, GWshould have done it right in the first place, but that's irrelevant because I can only play with what is written, not what should be.
You missed an option - 4) Ignore the whole sorry mess and play one of the multiple free, fully-functional, feature-complete versions of Necromunda that already exist until GW get their gak together, and if you're super desperate for it just house rule in alternate activation.
I prefer the new version, so option 4 isn't acceptable either. House-ruling errata is quicker and easier than house-ruling the fundamentals of the previous game (not just alternative activation, but the whole actions system), so I'll do the former rather than the latter.
Yup, option 4 is essentially use another houseruled set of rules with glaring problems over using a better fundamental set of rules that need a few minor fixes.
I mean, that's demonstrably untrue, but OK. Unless you'd care to point out where the original Necromunda or the NCE are missing whole rules, have rules that as-written don't actually function, have rules that as-written are worse than the rule they're intended to be better than, have warbands where the author apparently just forgot to give access to equipment that is fundamental to certain warband members to said members, etc etc?
You can prefer the new style of N17's rules if you like, and you can think putting up with its many, many flaws is worthwhile based on that preference, but the idea the original game is objectively in a worse state mechanically is just flat out, factually wrong. It's a functional set of rules, with some balance issues yes, but functional. N17 doesn't even appear to have been proofread.
You missed an option - 4) Ignore the whole sorry mess and play one of the multiple free, fully-functional, feature-complete versions of Necromunda that already exist until GW get their gak together, and if you're super desperate for it just house rule in alternate activation.
That is something I've heard people mention. It's not the best option for me because I have played the previous editions from time to time and now really wanted something fresh and different.
Kanluwen wrote: The part that I don't get about people being so pissy over is that since day one, GW made it clear we were getting a "Compilation" book like Blood Bowl got.
Why would any individuals be buying the books piecemeal when it could be considered a league/club cost instead?
Out of interest, Kan, where did they make this clear? I don't recall seeing anything around the initial release about a Compendium/Annual.
Admittedly, I could have inferred it from their (also poor) treatment of the Blood Bowl community by releasing the two Death Zone books, followed by springing an Annual on them.
I’d like to know that too.
Besides what your saying would make GW think “look, we’ve been right all these years, no one is buying it so let’s mothball Necromunda for another 25years.”
Buy the models, but not the rules? Also, I am sure GW must be aware of the extensive discussions about the poor state of the rules by now.
Not when that "different game" IS Necromunda. A version that has been enhanced and tweaked and balanced beyond GW efforts. The Necromunda Community Edition is fantastic. No cop out there.
After reading the rather poorly written rulebook last night (buddy sent me a free copy from a bonus box he picked up), and checking out some PDFs of the later gang war books...they're very light on information. If you're interested in playing Necromunda with the new rules, I think it would be very easy to bash together all the slop on your own and create a couple of necessary compendiums of weapons/skills, etc. If you're missing minor rules for things, just house-rule them or see what YakTribe is doing.
The Gang War books are so scant you could create a bulleted cheat-sheet for the whole book on 2-3 pages, easily. I did this for Mordheim when I was playing (converted the whole of the ruleset down to a couple of double-sided cheat sheets, weapons and all). I am pretty shocked at how poorly written/worded/organized this is for a professional publication.
Elbows wrote: After reading the rather poorly written rulebook last night (buddy sent me a free copy from a bonus box he picked up), and checking out some PDFs of the later gang war books...they're very light on information. If you're interested in playing Necromunda with the new rules, I think it would be very easy to bash together all the slop on your own and create a couple of necessary compendiums of weapons/skills, etc. If you're missing minor rules for things, just house-rule them or see what YakTribe is doing.
The Gang War books are so scant you could create a bulleted cheat-sheet for the whole book on 2-3 pages, easily. I did this for Mordheim when I was playing (converted the whole of the ruleset down to a couple of double-sided cheat sheets, weapons and all). I am pretty shocked at how poorly written/worded/organized this is for a professional publication.
That’s kind of the point. If you have to go to Yaktribe anyway, you might as well save your money and use one of the rule sets from there for free. They are complete and ready to go whereas the GW set is being sold as the proper rules and should be complete, better written and have the fluff we expect for being the legitimate game. The only work that players should have to do after buying a game is to paint the models up and select their gang. Players shouldn’t have to do research, create spreadsheets and then find others of the same mindset to agree to your interpretation of the rules to have a game.
Neronoxx wrote: It's funny watching the community here blame GW for forgeworlds mistakes.
Wierd position to take, especially since I'm sure you all don't give GW any credit for the Horus Heresy rules.
FW messes up all the time on rules, or even just basic formatting. I'm literally doubting that many of you have opened a BRB from them. They're not always horrible, but sometimes they're pretty bad.
Necromunda's about consistent. That is to say; you all need to leverage your expectations. I'd feel different if FW didn't have a track record for this kinda stuff.
But they do. Still remember when my Blood Angel 30k dreadnoughts could take 37 Assault cannons.
See, this is where I'm at with it. I'd like things to be better, but I can also accept the reality of NM being a FW product. And I know where that goes, almost inevitably. The saving grace is that these are products being sold by GW, and GW proper will almost certainly expect FW to release timely FAQs, etc. just as GW proper does now.
Regarding blaming GW for putting deadlines on FW...yeah, I think that's ridiculous. As a creative professional, I deal with deadlines (and not always of the reasonable variety) regularly. It's part of the job you have to learn to manage. I appreciate that 'old' FW -- as represented by the HH line and the IA books -- was some kind of rare creative nirvana in which they'd work on something as long as they wanted and released it whenever they felt like. But Specialist Games is operating on the GW calendar and has real deadlines and release windows to hit. Welcome to the rest of the world. *shrug*
Staffing is almost certainly still a big issue for them -- and I'm familiar with that pain. But I suspect we're also witnessing some pains as FW evolves. That 'leaked' e-mail or whatever that we saw recently about issues with NM's development sounded a lot like gripes from someone not liking the evolution.
JohnnyHell wrote: They simply haven't made that clear "since day one". Has it even been properly confirmed yet?
Nah, it's just someone's head-canon as far as I know.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vorian wrote: Yup, option 4 is essentially use another houseruled set of rules with glaring problems over using a better fundamental set of rules that need a few minor fixes.
I mean, that's demonstrably untrue, but OK. Unless you'd care to point out where the original Necromunda or the NCE are missing whole rules, have rules that as-written don't actually function, have rules that as-written are worse than the rule they're intended to be better than, have warbands where the author apparently just forgot to give access to equipment that is fundamental to certain warband members to said members, etc etc?
You can prefer the new style of N17's rules if you like, and you can think putting up with its many, many flaws is worthwhile based on that preference, but the idea the original game is objectively in a worse state mechanically is just flat out, factually wrong. It's a functional set of rules, with some balance issues yes, but functional. N17 doesn't even appear to have been proofread.
NCE is a bunch of houserules? I agree, NCE is good, but it's a community fix.
A community fix on a better core set is just better than a community fix on the old stuff.
Obviously an official fix - or better yet, competent proof reading in the first place is the ideal.
Elbows wrote: After reading the rather poorly written rulebook last night (buddy sent me a free copy from a bonus box he picked up), and checking out some PDFs of the later gang war books...they're very light on information. If you're interested in playing Necromunda with the new rules, I think it would be very easy to bash together all the slop on your own and create a couple of necessary compendiums of weapons/skills, etc. If you're missing minor rules for things, just house-rule them or see what YakTribe is doing.
The Gang War books are so scant you could create a bulleted cheat-sheet for the whole book on 2-3 pages, easily. I did this for Mordheim when I was playing (converted the whole of the ruleset down to a couple of double-sided cheat sheets, weapons and all). I am pretty shocked at how poorly written/worded/organized this is for a professional publication.
I've done that, and you are quite correct. It sums up to not too many pages for the complete thing (including the tiles, the 2d/3d stuff, the pre-game, post-game, innjuries, experience, gangs, hangers-on, hired guns, bounty hunters, scenarios, armoury and trading post). All in all I need 64 pages to fit absolutely everything.
A few really strong bonuses I'm happy with is: Collecting ALL actions into a single chapter. Collecting ALL weapons into a single armoury and trading post. And also removing the horrific Basic/Advanced chapters of the rules, and instead put the rules where they belong (like shooting, close combat etc).
So, some are back to blaming the customers for refusing to accept that they have to fix/houserules the mistakes in the rules.
Yeah Necro is not a competitive game, and is usually played with a group of persons you know pretty well, but this doesn't absolve GW/FW of the needs to have some sort of quality control. The thing that bothers me the most is that they have been completely silent on this subject, insteas of releasing an Errata ASAP.
It's almost like people expect a professional, large company; a merket leader of it's industry who charge premium prices for it's product to perform basic quailty control.
Not just of models but of it's written component. Things like basic proofreading.
The only thing bugging me with the relaunch of Necromunda is the limited attention it has been given by the GW marketing department. The game needs more coverage and ideally could have done with more gangs at launch.
It feels a little rushed and could perhaps have done with another six months in the cooker.
Zywus wrote: It's almost like people expect a professional, large company; a merket leader of it's industry who charge premium prices for it's product to perform basic quailty control.
Not just of models but of it's written component. Things like basic proofreading.
Amen to that. I was so hyped at the release of this boardgame but it took GW just a few months to completely kill off my enthusiasm for this game. Mark my words, they will also ruin Adeptus Titanicus.
I simply can’t understand the reasons behind not proofreading. Blaming deadlines is one thing when discussing the bad (awful) layout choices made or that rules that got renamed late in the project are not re-sorted or not playtesting enough - but simple stuff like going over the stat tables cannot take more than a few hours per book...
Within less than an hour of reading GW2 I had found so many glaring errors and extremely strange things I just put it aside for good. Same feelings for all other published N17 rulesets. Also I am firmly with Baxx regarding the mess with several types of play (2D, 3D - with simple and advanced variants).
In total this is just unacceptable.
Great minis, great game - but rules treated in a way that spit the fans in the face.
streetsamurai wrote: So, some are back to blaming the customers for refusing to accept that they have to fix/houserules the mistakes in the rules.
Who actually said what you're claiming there?
Anyhoo, back more OT. I was looking more at the GCult gang, and I'm surprised that they got the 'slow human' M4 statline across the board. I don't think they should have anything like Purestrain quicks, but I don't know why they'd be slower than Orlocks and on par with Goliaths. Especially considering that Agility is a secondary skill for them. So they're agile, but kind of plodding...? One does wonder how much time SG actually invested in developing this. And it leaves me a little concerned about what we'll see from the next two WD lists.
Still...I'll find a way to make 'em work. People used to say that Mordheim Witch Hunters stunk, but I usually had success with them.
streetsamurai wrote: So, some are back to blaming the customers for refusing to accept that they have to fix/houserules the mistakes in the rules.
Who actually said what you're claiming there?
Anyhoo, back more OT. I was looking more at the GCult gang, and I'm surprised that they got the 'slow human' M4 statline across the board. I don't think they should have anything like Purestrain quicks, but I don't know why they'd be slower than Orlocks and on par with Goliaths. Especially considering that Agility is a secondary skill for them. So they're agile, but kind of plodding...? One does wonder how much time SG actually invested in developing this. And it leaves me a little concerned about what we'll see from the next two WD lists.
Still...I'll find a way to make 'em work. People used to say that Mordheim Witch Hunters stunk, but I usually had success with them.
Perhaps it is due to the bulky mining suits? Although I think I read they are treated as wargear, not through the statline.
The movement rate thing is dumb. It makes me think the person who wrote it just took old necromunda content when the average move was 4" and just went with that. It makes no sense at all if you've read any GSC stories.
Maybe the Aberrants could be M4"? They look like big brutes, high on Toughness and Wounds like Goliath. I agree the others do not seem like slow walkers. Would be interesting to test them with standard move of 5". Think that would be unbalanced?
Chamberlain wrote: The movement rate thing is dumb. It makes me think the person who wrote it just took old necromunda content when the average move was 4" and just went with that. It makes no sense at all if you've read any GSC stories.
I suspect the same. Whoever wrote it seems to have just gone with M4 as the old human standard, without realising it's effectively been changed.
On a side note I was originally expecting M4 to be the standard with M5 being for the faster gangs (Escher, Delaque, Ratskins, maybe Cawdor). This would have also made sense with the Squats being M3. Shame they didn't go with that as it would have made things more interesting in my opinion.
From a game perspective they’re going to balance out profiles. You can’t have starting gangs that come loaded with immediately available memebers where opposition gangs have limited counter to. Genstealer Cult gangs in Oldmunda were a great example of how this could be done wrong. Infiltrating, M9 dodging combat monsters that appear out of nowhere were real campaign killers.
This seems like a counter to make GC a viable campaign gang. Fluff be dammed, it’s a game first and formost.
I knew I forgot to do something when I was at WHW yesterday - I was going to ask the guys in the FW bit if there was any word on an errata document for Newcromunda to clear up inconsistencies.
Mea culpa - I'm blaming this head cold for now, and the snow, OK?
On the other hand, did get to grab Gor and the Hired Guns
notprop wrote: From a game perspective they’re going to balance out profiles. You can’t have starting gangs that come loaded with immediately available memebers where opposition gangs have limited counter to. Genstealer Cult gangs in Oldmunda were a great example of how this could be done wrong. Infiltrating, M9 dodging combat monsters that appear out of nowhere were real campaign killers.
This seems like a counter to make GC a viable campaign gang. Fluff be dammed, it’s a game first and formost.
This doesn't make any sense. The game uses a points system for balancing. That allows the designers to make gangs play however they want, so long as an appropriate amount of points are paid. No one's advocating for GCults to be all that nonsense you mention. They're questioning why the alien guys with Agility skills don't have even an average human movement rate. GW games are all about rules matching fluff.
The most likely explanation here is sloppiness. *sigh* But I'm going to get these guys to work, even if they lumber around. I'm inclined to think that loading up on shooting -- backed by some solid countercharge -- is the best way to go with them anyway.
I did test some rules for Genestealer Cult in Necromunda 2nd edition about 15 years ago. I thought it was really cool to have a Genestealer, but found quickly out what's described above. It wasn't that insane, but had something like M6", WS6, S6, T4 and W2 if I remember correctly. It was still pretty much a slaughter in the same way as the Blood Thirster in w40k 2nd edition and Harlequins Solitaire in the more recent shadow war armageddon (charge across the table with WS 9 or 10, only 1 chance at stopping it with overwatch fire before it was over, and I think the solitaire had quite fancy anti-shooting tech too).
In the new team, there are no super killers. The closest thing is the Aberrants with S5, T4, W2. But they got slow M4" and no armour, so can either be pinned down or taken out more reliably with a special/heavy weapon (in most cases that's what those weapons are for!). The slow movement could give you more than one turn to do so.
notprop wrote: From a game perspective they’re going to balance out profiles. You can’t have starting gangs that come loaded with immediately available memebers where opposition gangs have limited counter to. Genstealer Cult gangs in Oldmunda were a great example of how this could be done wrong. Infiltrating, M9 dodging combat monsters that appear out of nowhere were real campaign killers.
This seems like a counter to make GC a viable campaign gang. Fluff be dammed, it’s a game first and formost.
This doesn't make any sense. The game uses a points system for balancing. That allows the designers to make gangs play however they want, so long as an appropriate amount of points are paid. No one's advocating for GCults to be all that nonsense you mention. They're questioning why the alien guys with Agility skills don't have even an average human movement rate. GW games are all about rules matching fluff.
The most likely explanation here is sloppiness. *sigh* But I'm going to get these guys to work, even if they lumber around. I'm inclined to think that loading up on shooting -- backed by some solid countercharge -- is the best way to go with them anyway.
Points don’t necessarily balance a game if that means you can buy a model that has little/no weaknesses. No movie marines for example.
Presides who says a mutated half-bred inherits all of the best bits of its two vastly different parents. The change from a human knee joint to the genestealer could create any sort of shambling monstrosity. The clue is in the name afterall.
notprop wrote: From a game perspective they’re going to balance out profiles. You can’t have starting gangs that come loaded with immediately available memebers where opposition gangs have limited counter to. Genstealer Cult gangs in Oldmunda were a great example of how this could be done wrong. Infiltrating, M9 dodging combat monsters that appear out of nowhere were real campaign killers.
This seems like a counter to make GC a viable campaign gang. Fluff be dammed, it’s a game first and formost.
This doesn't make any sense. The game uses a points system for balancing. That allows the designers to make gangs play however they want, so long as an appropriate amount of points are paid. No one's advocating for GCults to be all that nonsense you mention. They're questioning why the alien guys with Agility skills don't have even an average human movement rate. GW games are all about rules matching fluff.
The most likely explanation here is sloppiness. *sigh* But I'm going to get these guys to work, even if they lumber around. I'm inclined to think that loading up on shooting -- backed by some solid countercharge -- is the best way to go with them anyway.
Points don’t necessarily balance a game if that means you can buy a model that has little/no weaknesses. No movie marines for example.
Presides who says a mutated half-bred inherits all of the best bits of its two vastly different parents. The change from a human knee joint to the genestealer could create any sort of shambling monstrosity. The clue is in the name afterall.
I sincerly don't get your argument. Points would be able to balance a model with no weakness. He would cost a lot more realtively to models who have lots of weakness, but it wouldn't be necessarly unbalanced
I have spent 1000 creds on a mix of a dozen lowly gangers armed with a range of Imperial Standard flashlightslas-weapons.
My mate Dave has spent his 1000 creds on 1-3 high toughness, rapid movement killers.
Once Dave is in charge range he will cut through my gang without mercy particularly as Overwatch is a hard to get skill and my thematic weaponry is highly unlikely to prevent his charge happening no matter my tactics or manoeuvre.
As I say old GC had this and it broke every campaign I every saw it in. I take it that GW might have learnt from previous errors.
notprop wrote: I have spent 1000 creds on a mix of a dozen lowly gangers armed with a range of Imperial Standard flashlightslas-weapons.
My mate Dave has spent his 1000 creds on 1-3 high toughness, rapid movement killers.
Once Dave is in charge range he will cut through my gang without mercy particularly as Overwatch is a hard to get skill and my thematic weaponry is highly unlikely to prevent his charge happening no matter my tactics or manoeuvre.
As I say old GC had this and it broke every campaign I every saw it in. I take it that GW might have learnt from previous errors.
But the new GC doesn't have any standouts like that. They have less armour than average, no juves, and some combat specialists who compete with champions (but aren't much more impressive than a goliath champion). Making them slower just doesn't make sense.
notprop wrote: I have spent 1000 creds on a mix of a dozen lowly gangers armed with a range of Imperial Standard flashlightslas-weapons.
My mate Dave has spent his 1000 creds on 1-3 high toughness, rapid movement killers.
Once Dave is in charge range he will cut through my gang without mercy particularly as Overwatch is a hard to get skill and my thematic weaponry is highly unlikely to prevent his charge happening no matter my tactics or manoeuvre.
As I say old GC had this and it broke every campaign I every saw it in. I take it that GW might have learnt from previous errors.
I think you're in desperate need of some context here. We're looking at these statlines, and nothing like what you're talking about.
Acolytes (0-2, operate basically as Champions) 85 credits
M4 WS3+ BS3+ S4 T3 W1 I3+ A1 Ld4+ Cl5+ Wil7+ Int6+
Neophytes (operate like Gangers) 45 credits
M4 WS4+ BS4+ S3 T3 W1 I4+ A1 Ld7+ Cl5+ Wil6+ Int8+
Some nice leadership stats there, and the Acolytes get S4. But we're talking about W1, A1, T3 champions that are also M4. For 85 credits. If three of those guys rip through your entire gang, you're doing something terribly, terribly wrong and should probably give up miniatures gaming.
EDIT: Aberrants are bruisers, and no one is arguing with M4 for them. But these guys?
It's pretty frustrating how many errors are in the GS Cult WD rules (though hopefully the FAQ will fix this), but it's not a be all end all to me. My group and I were waiting for 4 gangs to start a campaign, so we'll be getting the GSC into action. I am working up some house rules and rule clarifications (the clarifications mostly come from the fine work done by the nice folks at Yakromunda), but I'm thinking of making the following changes to the GSC profile:
Acolytes: Up to movement 5 and come with a third arm (or drop the third arm, give it as a purchase option and reduce the cost by 20).
Neophytes: Up the movement to 5 and increase the cost to 50 (comparable to Orlock ganger but without Mesh armor).
I really like their general approach to the material, and I'm not an easy critic there. I kinda wish the execution was better...
In our group, I'm gonna push for the extra arm as standard for Acolytes. I can work around M4 (ick). I'm going to test out a strong base of Neophyte dakka (seismic cannons look PDG), a little Aberrant counterpunch, and probably infiltrating Acolytes deployed more as shooters than assaulters. We'll see how it goes.
I'm undecided on my Adept power, so I'll have to test out some things there too.
gorgon wrote: I really like their general approach to the material, and I'm not an easy critic there. I kinda wish the execution was better...
In our group, I'm gonna push for the extra arm as standard for Acolytes. I can work around M4 (ick). I'm going to test out a strong base of Neophyte dakka (seismic cannons look PDG), a little Aberrant counterpunch, and probably infiltrating Acolytes deployed more as shooters than assaulters. We'll see how it goes.
I'm undecided on my Adept power, so I'll have to test out some things there too.
Good luck with the extra arm (I'm guessing that it will probably be okay, it seems reasonable based on the Acolyte's cost), I'm really thinking that was GW's intention, and it explains the cost. Why else would there be no option for the Acolytes to obtain the extra arm when all the models have at least 3 arms? As is the Acolytes are hands down worse than a champion for the cost. This at least lets them compete considering their single wound and attack. I'm guessing we'll get an official answer on this from GW fairly soon.
Overall, the game takes a bit of work to make clarifications in the rules, but I love the game play. I think it's much more engaging and fun than the original Necromunda and I'm really happy GW decided to put it. Hopefully the FAQ will be out shortly and people can spend less time debating and more time playing.
Acolyte are bad even if they have 2W. You don't want them but you have to take them anyway, because you need the post-battle action.
If you put them in Zerg rush mode, the other guy just have to gun them down. And you're crippled next battle because you can't do Post-battle action.
Goliath zerg rush are scary because everyone in the gang are scary, they have cheap special weapon (compare to the other special weapon) for champions and leader to provide support from safe range. Even Goliath Juve are no slope if they have a brute cleaver.
Also with new alternate activation rule, overwatch are not really needed. And the actual Overwatch skill in the game are good, no 6+ to hit.
Really cool that the Genestealers have got a relaunch. I remember with the old version running a narrative for a campaign where the local arbites had offered a reward for having two nominated gangs try and hunt down a single purestrain (which we had made mentally tough in the rules, where it could disappear and pop out to snip a gangers head off, or even drag one away to give it the genestealer kiss - kind of like Alien). And in-between the guys playing the gangs couldn't help but have a shot at each other too, which kind of brought it back by itself
* that made some interesting additions to the 'out of action' results table at the end of the game..
Thebiggesthat wrote: It's no more competitive than Necromunda. The teams are all imbalanced and proudly so
The many hundreds of people that attend BB tournaments globally (which have sustained since the Specialist Games days and through the relaunch) would seem to indicate that BB is more suited to the tournament format, as even though it was still popular you didn't get that volume of events for Necromunda.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: It's pretty simple ATM I have no interest in buying N17 piecemeal.
I don't buy monthly comics anymore, I never bought a serialized novel and I won't buy this new game in quarterly installments.
Looking forward to the Necro Omnibus in 2020.
I've been doing a bit of reading about the releases and what is due and think I'm in the same boat, have got enough hobby-wise ongoing at the moment - will wait to see what things are like in a year's time. Hopefully the omnibus of WD rules and some FAQs will be out then, along of course with a selection of more gangs.
Thebiggesthat wrote: It's no more competitive than Necromunda. The teams are all imbalanced and proudly so
The many hundreds of people that attend BB tournaments globally (which have sustained since the Specialist Games days and through the relaunch) would seem to indicate that BB is more suited to the tournament format, as even though it was still popular you didn't get that volume of events for Necromunda.
Probably because you can play Blood Bowl as a series of games without necessarily bothering with advancement if you think that will unbalance things, and because a Blood Bowl tournament works narratively. Also because the fans spent a decade mercilessly removing all the more wacky elements of the game.
notprop wrote: I have spent 1000 creds on a mix of a dozen lowly gangers armed with a range of Imperial Standard flashlightslas-weapons.
My mate Dave has spent his 1000 creds on 1-3 high toughness, rapid movement killers.
Once Dave is in charge range he will cut through my gang without mercy particularly as Overwatch is a hard to get skill and my thematic weaponry is highly unlikely to prevent his charge happening no matter my tactics or manoeuvre.
As I say old GC had this and it broke every campaign I every saw it in. I take it that GW might have learnt from previous errors.
heh, at the very least it means that the points for these models were not balanced, it's not a proof of what you claimed previously
It's also got nothing to do with what's going on here. The gsc do not have some great stat advantage that needs to be balanced out by low movement. they're mostly regular humans and even the acolyte still has toughness 3 and not 4 like the goliaths.
I really do think that this is phoned in crap design work where they just took old necromunda content and did a quick conversion job and never proof read, edited or playtested it. Seems likely that the writer just plain missed that the average human is movement 5" in 2017 necro.
A quick conversation job? From what exactly? There was no Genestealer cult equivalent, there's a different stat line, there are weapons that only exist with the new GsC release.
M4 is weird, the proof reading mistakes are annoying, but not everything needs to devolve down into the most hyperbolic nonsense you can come up with.
Dice Monkey wrote: I find it disappointing they roll out Genestealer cults before the other houses and outlander gangs.
The bottleneck is models and the GS and chaos cults are already on the shelf.
I would not be shocked to see PDF/IG patrols or Eldar Rangers make an appearance.
That being said if GW was being nice they might release Beta versions of the other houses' rules and both build the game AND get free proofreading before the models come out.
Dice Monkey wrote: I find it disappointing they roll out Genestealer cults before the other houses and outlander gangs.
The bottleneck is models and the GS and chaos cults are already on the shelf.
I would not be shocked to see PDF/IG patrols or Eldar Rangers make an appearance.
That being said if GW was being nice they might release Beta versions of the other houses' rules and both build the game AND get free proofreading before the models come out.
Haven’t they already done that with the Legacy gangs document?
Oguhmek wrote: Ok, so Toxin now bypasses multiple wounds. Great against Leaders and Champions, not as great against gangers...
Oh but it's still extremely good against normal gangers. With a S3 weapon against a T3 ganger, assuming you hit, you have a 33% chance to first wound and then cause either a Serious Injury or OOA. With a Toxin weapon against a T3 ganger, assuming you hit, you have a 62,5% chance of the same result. S4 weapon against T3 ganger, the odds are 43,56%, so Toxin is still a lot better. Against multiple wound models the math is off the charts in favour of Toxin obviously. So basically Toxin weapons are incredible and might now be OP?
While the gangers of Necromunda may be hardened, cold-hearted killers, even they’re not immune to the charms of small critters, and more prestigious gang members are known to keep all manner of exotic pets.
This being Necromunda, such creatures are often as twisted and mutated as their owners, and more often than not, they’re employed by the gangs in their endless Turf Wars. Future Gang War supplements won’t just broaden your arsenal of weapons, armour, gadgets and gangs, but will also allow you to add these creatures to the mix.
At the Horus Heresy and Necromunda Weekender, we got a first look at what some of these might look like. Firstly, the Phyrr Cat, associated with House Escher.
We’re informed by the artist that she’s called Mabel and genuinely quite sweet once you get to know her. Provided she’s been fed.
We’ll be keeping you posted as to when you can add these critters to your gang, but in the meantime, make sure to grab the latest Gang War supplement for rules for Orlock gangs, Bounty Hunters, Hive Scum and much more…
I got a little bit confused in one of the earlier parts about movement:
"When activating a fighter to make any of the previously listed actions, declare a general direction in which they will move, then measure out the movement. A fighter is not obliged to move their full movement allowance, they can move any distance up to their movement allowance, but they cannot move further."
Then later in the same section, this comes up:
"Sometimes, when you measure out movement, it may become obvious that a fighter does not have as much movement as hoped and will end their movement short of where you had planned. In this case, move the fighter as far as possible in the desired direction, and try to make good use of any available cover!"
I mean, can I move "any distance up to their movement allowance" or must I "move the fighter as far as possible in the desired direction"?
Baxx wrote: The facts are: Gang War 2 is missing the rule. The only way to get the rule is through another paid content. In my eyes, that is sleazy. Should GW release a pdf where it is included, the problem is solved. So far they have not done that. That's all I got to add.
Sleazy implies that it was their intent to do that. Do you think they intended that?
Looks like Rending is included in the FAQ now, so that was a lot of fuzz for nothing
Automatically Appended Next Post:
malfred wrote: Woah, a GWFAQ. Glad to see that there' scontinued support
of this game. Looking forward to seeing more!
But there has been continued support every month if not every week even. And the support will most likely continue for more than 9 months ahead!
I got a little bit confused in one of the earlier parts about movement:
"When activating a fighter to make any of the previously listed actions, declare a general direction in
which they will move, then measure out the movement. A fighter is not obliged to move their full
movement allowance, they can move any distance up to their movement allowance, but they cannot
move further."
Then later in the same section, this comes up:
"Sometimes, when you measure out movement, it may become obvious that a fighter does not have as
much movement as hoped and will end their movement short of where you had planned. In this case,
move the fighter as far as possible in the desired direction, and try to make good use of any available
cover!"
I mean, can I move "any distance up to their movement allowance" or must I "move the fighter as far as possible in the desired direction"?
The second case is only when you don't have enough movement to get to where you want. You then move as far as possible.
In normal circumstances you can move "up to" their movement allowance
Ok, thanks for answer. There is one more thing that confuses me.
About Target Priority for shooting. I thought an attacking fighter cannot target an enemy if the enemy is both Prone and in cover (they are assumed to be out of sight). Don't remember the page number, think it was under some title like "Fighters In Hiding".
But the FAQ clearly says this:
Q. When making a Ranged Attack, can I ignore Prone fighters for the purposes of Target Priority? A. Good question. When a fighter is Prone, they are either Pinned or Seriously Injured. Often, a Pinned fighter can be ignored, as they are likely to be behind cover and harder to target, meaning that another fighter may be easier to hit. However if that is not the case, for instance, if the required hit roll for a Pinned fighter is the same as a fighter further away, the Pinned fighter takes priority. When a fighter is Seriously Injured, they do not represent the most obvious threat, therefore they can be freely ignored.
Yup, it essentially means being pinned makes no difference. You still check LoS/cover etc and the rules regarding target priority are the same as ever.
Maybe I have been misinformed. There never existed any rules for Target Priority that said you could not target Prone fighters in cover?
Another less important but slightly confusing text in the FAQ:
Pages 46 and 50 – Gangers: Equipment Q. Here and in the corresponding text in the Escher section on page 50, it states “They can be equipped with Armour…”, but no price for Armour is given in the whole book. It appears that only Leaders and Champions can have Armour, and they start with it. Is there a section on Armour missing? A. At present Gangers cannot buy Armour, but in the future more options will be introduced.
Certainly, Gangers start with armour? I can't find anything indicating that only Leaders and Champions can have Armour and only they start with it.
People wanted to know if they were obliged to target pinned enemies that were closest to them, or could they ignore them and target the closest guy on their feet.
The FAQ just says there is nothing special about being pinned when determining target priority.
So you would be obliged to target the nearest guy if he were pinned or not, unless he was harder to hit than a more distant enemy (exactly as is the case were he not pinned).
You still lie models down that are Pinned, don't you? Which usually means they go from being partially obscured by cover to being totally out of LOS. If you can still see a Pinned model (if they're out in the open, for example), then feel free to shoot the fool.
I had the impression you could not target Prone fighters partially obscured by cover (this was perhaps incorrect on my part). Rarely does any of my fighters go totally out of LOS simply by laying them down. The FAQ indicates that even if a Prone fighter is in cover, they still need to be harder to hit in order to be ignored by Target Priority.
No; there's a difference between Prone and Pinned. Models that are Pinned and models that are Seriously Injured are both Prone (as are models that voluntarily choose to go Prone, if that's allowed), but it's not being Prone that means you don't have to target them if they're closest; it's being Seriously Injured.
You can target a Seriously Injured fighter if you want (but they'd need to be the closest target); it's just that you can ignore them if they're closer than other models (who may be standing or Pinned and Prone).
Thanks alot. I thought I remembered specifically that Prone fighters (Pinned & Seriously Injured) that are in cover could not be targeted, I was clearly mistaken!
Edit: Just came home from work, opened up the rulebook to find this:
FIGHTERS IN HIDING
The attacking fighter cannot target an enemy if the enemy is both Prone (see page 43) and in cover (see page 49) - they are assumed to be out of sight. -Underhive Rulebook, page 48, chapter Shooting
...just saying.
So back to the confusing part:
There is one more thing that confuses me.
About Target Priority for shooting. An attacking fighter clearly cannot target an enemy if the enemy is both Prone and in cover (they are assumed to be out of sight).
But the FAQ says something completely different:
Q. When making a Ranged Attack, can I ignore Prone fighters for the purposes of Target Priority? A. Good question. When a fighter is Prone, they are either Pinned or Seriously Injured. Often, a Pinned fighter can be ignored, as they are likely to be behind cover and harder to target, meaning that another fighter may be easier to hit. However if that is not the case, for instance, if the required hit roll for a Pinned fighter is the same as a fighter further away, the Pinned fighter takes priority. When a fighter is Seriously Injured, they do not represent the most obvious threat, therefore they can be freely ignored.
(Bold font added by me)
I think this FAQ is a good thing and I want to encourage more of it, but it is slightly frustrating to see answers about what types of "ranking" in mid-campaign could be "fun". There's still quite a few unanswered questions completely ignored (some I noted down here): - When you hire a Champion their stat caps for Wounds and Attacks is 3. Juves and Gangers who become Champions through promotion have a cap of 2 for those same stats, meaning a Promoted Champion is inferior to one that is hired. - Juves require 6 advancements to match the stats of a ganger, which even when you take into account the 10xp for +1 M and +1 I puts them 34xp behind a Ganger. They are never going to be worth the 30 credits you save by hiring one instead of a Ganger. - Juve maximum stats cap much lower than a normal fighter of any other type, in long term campaigns it makes them redundant. - The Gang Value increase for WS/BS and WP/Int seems to be the opposite of the Champion/Leader/Juve table. - Escher Laspistol/Lasgun costs 5/10 in rulebook, but 10/5 in Gang War 1. -Deadlock Tactics card should be Zone Mortalis only, but says Sector Mechanicus Only (the card interacts with Doors) -Does Champions/Leaders start with 1 advancement (initial skill) or not? GW1 page 14 says it is an advancement, but example on GW1 page 16 ignores this. -Goliath Stimm Surge card, what happens on a 4+? - Since blast and template weapons don't target fighters, they can make attacks against fighters that are Hidden. Is this on purpose? -Stub gun has plentiful, but plasma/stub combi-pistol does not have plentiful for stub gun (Main rule book) - When charging, what happens when move is insufficient to bring model in b2b, but still within 1”? -stray shots hits on 4+, better to target a distant enemy, with higher probability hitting someone in between (even if they have more cover) - The rules and cost of Grenade Launcher makes it an extremely powerful weapon for its cost. No negative to hit modifier, no need to target closest enemy and high chance of hitting even if the hit roll fails due to how scatter works.
We also have a ton of weapon profile inconsistencies: -Lasgun short range, 16" or 18"? The FAQ just compares the two in the main rulebook, doesn't mention the 3rd alternative in GW1 and GW2 at all. -Fighting knife has different profile on the pre-made cards for Grendel and Varik -Shock whip is still not answered for. -Spud-jacker has different profiles on pre-made card for Nox and Brakk -Stiletto knife has different profiles on pre-made cards and rulebook/GW1. -Blasting charge have different radius in GW2 from Genestealer Cult article (maybe too soon to be FAQ'ed). -Krumper Rivet cannon has different profile in pre-made card for Grendel and GW1/2/rulebook. -Plasma-stub combi pistol has different Traits not accounted for in FAQ. -Stub gun still not accounted for (no Pistol trait in GW2) -Needle rifle (part of Combi bolter) in Gang War 1 has +1 to hit short range, S4 and no damage while Needle rifle in Gang War 2 has no hit modifiers, S5 and D1. (Needle pistol in White Dwarf Genestealer Cult has +2 to hit short range, S4 and no damage).
Perhaps you would have been better served sending that post to NecromundaFAQ@gwplc.com
As for errors in GW 2, this document is fairly clear that it doesn't cover that book yet.
Looking at the bits you've quoted about being Prone and behind cover, the important bit on page 48 of the rulebook is "they are assumed to be out of sight", because the Zone Mortalis rules use a top-down 2D LOS rule. If you're using the Sector Mechanicus rules, then a model lying down behind one of the plastic barricades (or equivalent terrain) is indeed out of sight because of the reduced height of the model.
AndrewGPaul wrote: Perhaps you would have been better served sending that post to NecromundaFAQ@gwplc.com
As for errors in GW 2, this document is fairly clear that it doesn't cover that book yet.
Looking at the bits you've quoted about being Prone and behind cover, the important bit on page 48 of the rulebook is "they are assumed to be out of sight", because the Zone Mortalis rules use a top-down 2D LOS rule. If you're using the Sector Mechanicus rules, then a model lying down behind one of the plastic barricades (or equivalent terrain) is indeed out of sight because of the reduced height of the model.
They use the base to determine LoS in that right? So if they're prone there's no base to use to determine it, so they need that simplification.
I think it's more that it doesn't take height of a model or a terrain element into account, so in this particular case, a model being upright or Prone would otherwise mot make any difference to determining LOS.
I hadn't considered that that the core rules only apply to the 2D terrain, meaning prone models in cover aren't actually considered to be out of sight on 3D terrain. Good spot.
Looking at the bits you've quoted about being Prone and behind cover, the important bit on page 48 of the rulebook is "they are assumed to be out of sight", because the Zone Mortalis rules use a top-down 2D LOS rule. If you're using the Sector Mechanicus rules, then a model lying down behind one of the plastic barricades (or equivalent terrain) is indeed out of sight because of the reduced height of the model.
I don't think I've ever gotten a model out of sight just by laying them down. While it's certainly possible, it never has occured in any games I've played so far. You are inferring the Zone Mortalis bit, and yes, it was written with Zone Mortalis in mind. However, other rules were written with 3d in mind (Gang War 1) and no where have I found any rule there which replaces or removes the original rule in the rulebook. Unless stated otherwise, the core rules in the underhive rulebook applies to any game regardless of 2d/3d (Gang War 1 mentions many of these core rules that does not apply to 3d. I can't see that Fighters In Hiding is one of them).
This was discussed over at Yaktribe, and there was no confusion about this rule applied to any game there.
Well you have the situation where the hiding rule makes sense as a work around for 2D / having no base and you have the Faq answer.
The only way they make sense together is if being prone doesn't make you auto hide in cover in the full rules. (Or they've just ballsed up).
About the Juve/Champion max stats. I'm going to have to dig the books out when I get home, but is this not a matter of Juves becoming champions when the campaign ends? So a Juve has a max profile in one campaign, then becomes a fully fledged champion in the next and uses those max stats?
About the Juve/Champion max stats. I'm going to have to dig the books out when I get home, but is this not a matter of Juves becoming champions when the campaign ends? So a Juve has a max profile in one campaign, then becomes a fully fledged champion in the next and uses those max stats?
Juve stat is not changed when they are promoted to champion, they keep their stat and credit value. Only thing that change is their wargear restriction and type, and I assume they also get armor.
I'm not saying their stats change - only that they now are "Champions" (with their old stats, skills, credit value) and so they now use "Champion" restrictions for equipment, skills tables and max stats
Baxx wrote: I don't think I've ever gotten a model out of sight just by laying them down.
The plastic barricade sections in the box (and the larger barricade pieces in the Sector Mechanicus sets) are more than 25mm high; any Escher model laid down behind one will be out of LOS.
In any case, I don't think the rule from page 48 and the FAQ entry contradict each other.
on page 48, Necromunda Underhive wrote:
FIGHTERS IN HIDING
The attacking fighter cannot target an enemy if the enemy is both Prone (see page 43) and in cover (see page 49) - they are assumed to be out of sight.
Necromunda FAQ wrote:
Q. When making a Ranged Attack, can I ignore Prone fighters for the purposes of Target Priority?
A. Good question. When a fighter is Prone, they are either Pinned or Seriously Injured. Often, a
Pinned fighter can be ignored, as they are likely to be behind cover and harder to target, meaning
that another fighter may be easier to hit. However if that is not the case, for instance, if the required
hit roll for a Pinned fighter is the same as a fighter further away, the Pinned fighter takes priority.
When a fighter is Seriously Injured, they do not represent the most obvious threat, therefore they can
be freely ignored.
Taking both into account,
1. Models Prone behind cover are considered to be out of LOS - so they are ignored when choosing a target.
2. There is a Pinned model 12" away and a standing model 14" away, both in the open. I must target the Pinned model.
3. There is a Seriously Injured model in the open 12" away and a standing model in the open 14" away. I can shoot the standing model.
Expanding on point 1., I'll need to check the rules for the definition of "in cover". Is "in cover" a different situation to "partial cover" (or whatever it's called? if so, a model that is Prone and in partial cover will NOT be out of LOS, and merely have a to-hit penalty applied to shots targeting that model as usual.
Baxx wrote: I don't think I've ever gotten a model out of sight just by laying them down.
The plastic barricade sections in the box (and the larger barricade pieces in the Sector Mechanicus sets) are more than 25mm high; any Escher model laid down behind one will be out of LOS.
It's not only the height, it's most of all the width. How tall are the escher models? How wide are the barricade pieces?
AndrewGPaul wrote: The height of the Escher model is irrelevant if they're placed lying back from the barricade. In any case, they're about 2" wide.
You should know this, surely? They come in the game.
Depends on the angle, don't it? Not sure if I ever measured them, or it is a long time ago. Mostly played with 3d terrain too (still used some barricades, but mostly on ground level).
I just made a test and literally the first barricade I picked up was less than the width of a lying down model.
It was possible to 100% obscure a lying down model if the model was centered on the middle of the barricade before being Prone. However, this haven't come up any time I've played so far.
Trying to drag this somewhere near on topic - how much has the FAQ really cleared up? What should people be sending to the FAQ email address first when it comes to getting more stuff cleared up - weapon profile inconsistencies?
Dysartes wrote: Trying to drag this somewhere near on topic - how much has the FAQ really cleared up? What should people be sending to the FAQ email address first when it comes to getting more stuff cleared up - weapon profile inconsistencies?
Not sure of answer for your first question, sorry. As for what people should send, I think we should all send them part of a question, but not the whole question, then send the rest of the question in a few weeks. You should let them know that the questions will be released in quarterly amounts but their will be a compilation at the end of the year.
Dysartes wrote: Trying to drag this somewhere near on topic - how much has the FAQ really cleared up? What should people be sending to the FAQ email address first when it comes to getting more stuff cleared up - weapon profile inconsistencies?
Not sure of answer for your first question, sorry. As for what people should send, I think we should all send them part of a question, but not the whole question, then send the rest of the question in a few weeks. You should let them know that the questions will be released in quarterly amounts but their will be a compilation at the end of the year.
My thanks for the best post on dakka all week.
Exalted.
axisofentropy wrote: i'm waiting to play necromunda in 2019 is this a good plan?
It couldn't hurt, the game is still playable right now and there are now four modernized functional gangs released. But if you are more interested in gangs like Van Saar/Delaque/Cawdor then it's worth waiting. The only thing you might be able to get out of waiting is hopefully a compilation book, a full lineup of gangs and a well established playerbase locally. The latter of which is questionable though.
^^^ this. Is what I am waiting for.
I don’t want current 3 gang and gun for hire, but I own genestealers cult which are bonus. Core rule book are in wrong book at the moment.
The toxin fix is huge. Not just in power levels (Eschers vs Goliaths has been incredibly frustrating as I struggle to cause injuries) but also just to be able to play fluffy. They retcon Eschers to have all this cool toxin stuff but people are forced to avoid all forms of poison. The only frustrating thing is none of my Eschers are built to utilize toxins.
axisofentropy wrote: i'm waiting to play necromunda in 2019 is this a good plan?
It couldn't hurt, the game is still playable right now and there are now four modernized functional gangs released. But if you are more interested in gangs like Van Saar/Delaque/Cawdor then it's worth waiting. The only thing you might be able to get out of waiting is hopefully a compilation book, a full lineup of gangs and a well established playerbase locally. The latter of which is questionable though.
I'm patiently awaiting Delaque.........glad I'm not playing with all these issues.
Slightly OT... but slightly not, since the FAQ just dropped... what is currently the best place for Necro 17 rules discussion? I can't find anywhere that's very active.
The biggest rules concern in my group wasn't touched in the FAQ, and I've never really seen any discussion of it online:
It relates to the targeting rules for templates. To me, they seem like a mess. You aim at a point, not a model. You're left to interpret whether that covers the vertical 3D space in the gameplay area. If it does then someone can legally fire a template at a spot 10" above the board and possibly*** hit models under it who are hidden behind an 8" wall and completely obscured to the shooter. Basically, it turns templates into indirect fire weapons.
The alternative interpretation is that the targeted spot must be on the surface of the board, and this interpretation is just as crappy. It means that a model can stand behind a 0.5" barricade and be untargetable by a template fired from the same height, because the firer will not be able to see the point on the board behind the barricade.
*** I say possibly because the rules for who is hit by a template are also somewhat unclear. It says models "touched" by the template are hit, whereas I believe most past editions of GW games stated models "under" a template were hit. You can get some weirdness using the "touched" interpretation (ie. say a model is standing with its head 0.0005" below the feet of an adjacent ally... "touched" means only one of them could be hit by it. Unless you can place the template canted... god, it gets messier the more I think about it....
Altruizine wrote: Slightly OT... but slightly not, since the FAQ just dropped... what is currently the best place for Necro 17 rules discussion? I can't find anywhere that's very active.
The biggest rules concern in my group wasn't touched in the FAQ, and I've never really seen any discussion of it online:
It relates to the targeting rules for templates. To me, they seem like a mess. You aim at a point, not a model. You're left to interpret whether that covers the vertical 3D space in the gameplay area. If it does then someone can legally fire a template at a spot 10" above the board and possibly*** hit models under it who are hidden behind an 8" wall and completely obscured to the shooter. Basically, it turns templates into indirect fire weapons.
The alternative interpretation is that the targeted spot must be on the surface of the board, and this interpretation is just as crappy. It means that a model can stand behind a 0.5" barricade and be untargetable by a template fired from the same height, because the firer will not be able to see the point on the board behind the barricade.
*** I say possibly because the rules for who is hit by a template are also somewhat unclear. It says models "touched" by the template are hit, whereas I believe most past editions of GW games stated models "under" a template were hit. You can get some weirdness using the "touched" interpretation (ie. say a model is standing with its head 0.0005" below the feet of an adjacent ally... "touched" means only one of them could be hit by it. Unless you can place the template canted... god, it gets messier the more I think about it....
Facebook groups are the most active. For example The Underhive or Necromunda 2017 (not Necromunda Worldwide, it’s a cesspool).
The alternative interpretation is that the targeted spot must be on the surface of the board, and this interpretation is just as crappy. It means that a model can stand behind a 0.5" barricade and be untargetable by a template fired from the same height, because the firer will not be able to see the point on the board behind the barricade.
*** I say possibly because the rules for who is hit by a template are also somewhat unclear. It says models "touched" by the template are hit, whereas I believe most past editions of GW games stated models "under" a template were hit. You can get some weirdness using the "touched" interpretation (ie. say a model is standing with its head 0.0005" below the feet of an adjacent ally... "touched" means only one of them could be hit by it. Unless you can place the template canted... god, it gets messier the more I think about it....
Barricade do not protect a model from blast marker, only wall and closed door. Barricade also do not stop a grenade from scattering. You cannot target the feet of a model hugging a barricade but you can target the barricade, and the area around
Ofc if the opponent is feeling cheeky they can chose to move X radius away from the barricade, in that case their fighter are more exposed from other angle, unless you have a 10 miles long barricade, in that case, try moving to higher ground (and stop making horrible terrain set up like this)
Blast marker don't expand vertically, but if you're feeling like that's being unfair to you, you can use the "smoke" rule for blast marker. They expand X radius away from the center. Then go and spam the faq team, facebook team until you got answer.
It's not. There was about two days of OTT reaction there when the mass of non-obsessive folk first found out about the whole Underhive/Gang War-per-quarter rules carve up around release time, but it's been perfectly fine since. By which I mean, it's a normal Warhammer group - if you're using The Underhive as your yardstick it would indeed be considered a "cesspool" since it permits such monstrous activities as "not thinking the rules are very good(in terms of quality/proofreading etc)" or "expressing mild dissatisfaction with the Specialist Games business model", which generally get the INQ28-run parts of the Facebook community fetching their burning brands and pitchforks.
It's not. There was about two days of OTT reaction there when the mass of non-obsessive folk first found out about the whole Underhive/Gang War-per-quarter rules carve up around release time, but it's been perfectly fine since. By which I mean, it's a normal Warhammer group - if you're using The Underhive as your yardstick it would indeed be considered a "cesspool" since it permits such monstrous activities as "not thinking the rules are very good(in terms of quality/proofreading etc)" or "expressing mild dissatisfaction with the Specialist Games business model", which generally get the INQ28-run parts of the Facebook community fetching their burning brands and pitchforks.
While heavily exaggerated, this sounds like an endorsement to me!
Altruizine wrote: Slightly OT... but slightly not, since the FAQ just dropped... what is currently the best place for Necro 17 rules discussion? I can't find anywhere that's very active.
Yaktribe is very active.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dysartes wrote: Trying to drag this somewhere near on topic - how much has the FAQ really cleared up? What should people be sending to the FAQ email address first when it comes to getting more stuff cleared up - weapon profile inconsistencies?
A lot of questions, there is a summary over at yaktribe in compilation.
It's not. There was about two days of OTT reaction there when the mass of non-obsessive folk first found out about the whole Underhive/Gang War-per-quarter rules carve up around release time, but it's been perfectly fine since. By which I mean, it's a normal Warhammer group - if you're using The Underhive as your yardstick it would indeed be considered a "cesspool" since it permits such monstrous activities as "not thinking the rules are very good(in terms of quality/proofreading etc)" or "expressing mild dissatisfaction with the Specialist Games business model", which generally get the INQ28-run parts of the Facebook community fetching their burning brands and pitchforks.
While heavily exaggerated, this sounds like an endorsement to me!
Personally, I prefer to be part of communities that permit people to hold and express their own points of view, and which don't consider it their responsibility to police the way people play. But hey what do I know, I was under the mistaken impression INQ28 was about cool models and a focus on narrative, whereas evidently it's actually about insisting points-based force composition and crunchy rules are fundamentally incompatible with narrative gaming and ensuring that nobody discusses the actual product at all(except to praise it, of course, all those prohibitions on "discussing GW business practices" seem to vanish into the aether when the discussion in question is enthusiastic, uncritical endorsement).
It's not. There was about two days of OTT reaction there when the mass of non-obsessive folk first found out about the whole Underhive/Gang War-per-quarter rules carve up around release time, but it's been perfectly fine since. By which I mean, it's a normal Warhammer group - if you're using The Underhive as your yardstick it would indeed be considered a "cesspool" since it permits such monstrous activities as "not thinking the rules are very good(in terms of quality/proofreading etc)" or "expressing mild dissatisfaction with the Specialist Games business model", which generally get the INQ28-run parts of the Facebook community fetching their burning brands and pitchforks.
What actually happened was a couple of weeks of grognards throwing manchild tantrums before anything solid was even known about the game, other than that it was not a literal reprint of the original. People having opinons is not a problem, people going off the rails based on nothing but their own imagination is another matter.
+1 for Yaktribe, those guys are incredible and doing a lot of legitimate work to make the game better and clearer. I got the first game under my belt yest, and searching the book for 3 diff pages to clarify what happens in a single common instance sucked. I am beginning to see why people were complaining about the rule books, lack of index, etc. Was still fun though, despite that!
Ehsteve wrote: Unfortunately Imperial Guard is not on the list.
Quiet, you rat hole loser!
That said, Stuart and especially Ed have worse names when using that list.
Ehsteve wrote: Group Tactics just got a whole lot better, but the FAQ still needs to clarify whether models need to be within 4" to use that gang tactic.
Wait 'til you see the Oclock cards next time we play. There's some fun stuff in there.
It's not. There was about two days of OTT reaction there when the mass of non-obsessive folk first found out about the whole Underhive/Gang War-per-quarter rules carve up around release time, but it's been perfectly fine since. By which I mean, it's a normal Warhammer group - if you're using The Underhive as your yardstick it would indeed be considered a "cesspool" since it permits such monstrous activities as "not thinking the rules are very good(in terms of quality/proofreading etc)" or "expressing mild dissatisfaction with the Specialist Games business model", which generally get the INQ28-run parts of the Facebook community fetching their burning brands and pitchforks.
What actually happened was a couple of weeks of grognards throwing manchild tantrums before anything solid was even known about the game, other than that it was not a literal reprint of the original. People having opinons is not a problem, people going off the rails based on nothing but their own imagination is another matter.
More like a couple of days, but regardless that was both months ago and perpetrated largely by people who moved on after saying their piece or who have calmed down now and stopped acting like stroppy tweens. To insist that the group is, now, at the present time, a "cesspool", or that it was such for any meaningful period of time is just a flat out, actual lie. By contrast, my assessment of The Underhive is accurate and current - no expression of criticism, no matter how measured or accurate, is permitted to stand. Now, evidently some people like that kind of "shut up and post pretty piccies" environment, so it's great they have a place to go, but actually wanting to discuss the supposed subject at hand and being allowed to do so without active suppression of certain viewpoints by the mods does not make somewhere a "cesspool" and the fact that some folk feel the need to try and dissuade people from going to the group that does allow such things is just a bit sad.
Altruizine wrote: Slightly OT... but slightly not, since the FAQ just dropped... what is currently the best place for Necro 17 rules discussion? I can't find anywhere that's very active.
The biggest rules concern in my group wasn't touched in the FAQ, and I've never really seen any discussion of it online:
It relates to the targeting rules for templates. To me, they seem like a mess. You aim at a point, not a model. You're left to interpret whether that covers the vertical 3D space in the gameplay area. If it does then someone can legally fire a template at a spot 10" above the board and possibly*** hit models under it who are hidden behind an 8" wall and completely obscured to the shooter. Basically, it turns templates into indirect fire weapons.
The alternative interpretation is that the targeted spot must be on the surface of the board, and this interpretation is just as crappy. It means that a model can stand behind a 0.5" barricade and be untargetable by a template fired from the same height, because the firer will not be able to see the point on the board behind the barricade.
*** I say possibly because the rules for who is hit by a template are also somewhat unclear. It says models "touched" by the template are hit, whereas I believe most past editions of GW games stated models "under" a template were hit. You can get some weirdness using the "touched" interpretation (ie. say a model is standing with its head 0.0005" below the feet of an adjacent ally... "touched" means only one of them could be hit by it. Unless you can place the template canted... god, it gets messier the more I think about it....
I've always played that templates are spheres or cones, not an infinitely tall projection - solves all those issues. As for targeting, I've again always played that weapons using the round templates have impact fuses, not timed fuses, unless the rules specify otherwise - no targeting a point in mid-air, because there's nothing to detonate the projectile there. Fire at a model or a point on the ground. Anything else leads to nonsense, so by a process of proof by contradiction, I'll keep doing it my way.
As for the name of my hypothetical Orlock gang, it'd be the Ash-Waste Posse - they'd do quite well against the Acid Princesses and Armoured Princes, I think.
The Van Saar gang was just revealed at GAMA, couple images on instagram. They look very techy with an over the shoulder plasma launcher/laser weapon. This could definitely end up being my gang, need to see more though.
edit:
And now the full reveal is up on the community site.
Thargrim wrote: The Van Saar gang was just revealed at GAMA, couple images on instagram. They look very techy with an over the shoulder plasma launcher/laser weapon. This could definitely end up being my gang, need to see more though.
Thargrim wrote: The Van Saar gang was just revealed at GAMA, couple images on instagram. They look very techy with an over the shoulder plasma launcher/laser weapon. This could definitely end up being my gang, need to see more though.
Link?
It's already up on the official WH community site, with a reveal video. Gonna have a look now.
The Van Saar are the latest classic faction from Necromunda to be revamped, featuring new wargear and some of the deadliest weapons the underhive has to offer. You won’t have to wait too long for these guys – or their rules – to land, so stay tuned
Yeah after a good look i'm kinda torn. They do look good, but also almost look too techy/borderline xeno tech. And not really like something that belongs in the imperium. Kinda like 3rd party sculpts. On one hand it's good they are different and distinct, but they look more bizarre than I was expecting.
Pretty sure two rumor engines are now solved as well, the shoulder cannon and the rigs on their backs are two of the more recent rumor engines.
They have Halo style ARs, dual plasma, and a clear plastic mirror shield, that's something we haven't seen since necrons on infantry if I am not mistaken...
Loving it. New takes on weapons, infinity style armor, mixed gender, great design. I'm in!
These look awesome. Also, plastic bullpup lasguns make me happy.
The inferno pistol is a combi-las inferno pistol The las pistols also look very heavy duty, and have a cylinder on the back, which makes me think they may be hot-shot laspistols?
Mixed sex - great. The basic armour design - awesome. Not quite sure about the cyber-ponytail or the facemasks. The weapons are a mixed bag; the aesthetic really works for me when it's doing funky versions of basic gear, the lasguns, hotshot laspistol & plasma pistols are cool, but I'm not sold on the bigger plasma weapon with the lightning globe thing embedded in it, nor the big shouldered heavy weapon, and the melta weapon just looks...odd.
Overall though, another solid update of the original aesthetic, and I'll probably reserve judgement on the bits that don't initially appeal until I see the sprues and some non-GW paintjobs.
While I don't "hate" any of the previous gangs, none have interested me. I've long been a Cawdor guy, with a soft spot for Van Saar and Delaque shortly behind.
I am soooo hoping they don't screw the pooch with Cawdor or I'll be saddened. Van Saar is the first gang I'll bother to buy. I think they'd make a great kit to bash some hired guns, and they would make great non-40K generic sci-fi figures for a ton of games. Heck, the four-lens mask is very Gasaraki - and would look great on a custom Imperial Assassin, etc.
I think the bits from these Necromunda gangs are going to heavily infiltrate a lot of customized characters going forward in 40K for a lot of people.
I think they look really cool, and they definitely have a distinct vibe. I like how they incorporated a bit of the spider motif into some of their gear (the shield and the new multi-eyed photovisors). If Necromunda gangs continue to look this good I will own them all (I'm already 3/3 and will definitely be getting this one), and only my poor wallet will be lamenting.
And GW put out a teaser for a new version of Kill Team as well as a Chaos BB team (which if can be used in the new fast play BB....)....it's going to be an expensive Spring.
Bloody hell those Van Saar are beautiful, the masks tying them in with their symbol and presumably their pet, the Necromundan spider, is amazing, as are the energy shields (another DUNE flashback, eh?).
Haighus wrote: I'm expecting some kind of combi-hand flamer las for Cawdor!
Don’t be silly.
It’ll be a can of deodorant tied to a Peasant that’s holding a lighter.
That’s the Cawdor way!
You guys are actually pointing out my main concern.
The original Cawdor gang, while religious zealots were nothing like the later (and far too silly) Redemptionists. I'm afraid they're going to mix the two and the gang will be far too Blanche-Redemptionist and nothing like the less-silly Cawdor models of old. I'd like to be proven wrong, but I just have a feeling the one gang I like is going to be ruined. They've done a great job on all the gangs thus far - even the ones I don't like. So I fully expect to be saddene when Cawdor is actualy shown.
Haighus wrote: I'm expecting some kind of combi-hand flamer las for Cawdor!
Don’t be silly.
It’ll be a can of deodorant tied to a Peasant that’s holding a lighter.
That’s the Cawdor way!
You guys are actually pointing out my main concern.
The original Cawdor gang, while religious zealots were nothing like the later (and far too silly) Redemptionists. I'm afraid they're going to mix the two and the gang will be far too Blanche-Redemptionist and nothing like the less-silly Cawdor models of old. I'd like to be proven wrong, but I just have a feeling the one gang I like is going to be ruined. They've done a great job on all the gangs thus far - even the ones I don't like. So I fully expect to be saddene when Cawdor is actualy shown.
Seeing as how the Van Saar gang turned out exactly like the concept image from a little while back, i'd expect Cawdor to look more or less the same as the concept that was also shown for them. So masked creepy, peasant medieval type dudes. There may be some spikes, rope n candles. But they shouldn't be having those tall hats and the hoods might be going bye bye in favor of full face/head masks. Cawdor has the potential to be the best looking of all the gangs and if you like the look of that artwork that was shown then you should be safe. But keep in might they seem to be taking the style of the old gangs and cranking it up/stylising it even further, so i'd expect them to look more extreme than the old figures.
I mean, they clearly share some aesthetic traits. I just find the fact that people use Infinity as a point of reference for those designs somewhat amusing.
Pity there seems to be no unmasked female heads, all shown so far were old dudes, though maybe there are some on the sprue. The guns are sexy, though naked hands do limit the possibility of conversions. Why, just why the bodysuit faction had to have stupidly naked arms when GW already shown how to make excellent industrial gloves with GC?
Also, the video wasted such monumentally good possibility. Why isn't fanatical devotion to the Hive one of their chief weapons?
Haighus wrote: I'm expecting some kind of combi-hand flamer las for Cawdor!
Don’t be silly.
It’ll be a can of deodorant tied to a Peasant that’s holding a lighter.
That’s the Cawdor way!
You guys are actually pointing out my main concern.
The original Cawdor gang, while religious zealots were nothing like the later (and far too silly) Redemptionists. I'm afraid they're going to mix the two and the gang will be far too Blanche-Redemptionist and nothing like the less-silly Cawdor models of old. I'd like to be proven wrong, but I just have a feeling the one gang I like is going to be ruined. They've done a great job on all the gangs thus far - even the ones I don't like. So I fully expect to be saddene when Cawdor is actualy shown.
Seeing as how the Van Saar gang turned out exactly like the concept image from a little while back, i'd expect Cawdor to look more or less the same as the concept that was also shown for them. So masked creepy, peasant medieval type dudes. There may be some spikes, rope n candles. But they shouldn't be having those tall hats and the hoods might be going bye bye in favor of full face/head masks. Cawdor has the potential to be the best looking of all the gangs and if you like the look of that artwork that was shown then you should be safe. But keep in might they seem to be taking the style of the old gangs and cranking it up/stylising it even further, so i'd expect them to look more extreme than the old figures.
They may keep the tall hats and hoods, given that the Nurgle Wizards in Vermintide 2 actually have them.
Pity there seems to be no unmasked female heads, all shown so far were old dudes, though maybe there are some on the sprue. The guns are sexy, though naked hands do limit the possibility of conversions. Why, just why the bodysuit faction had to have stupidly naked arms when GW already shown how to make excellent industrial gloves with GC?
Also, the video wasted such monumentally good possibility. Why isn't fanatical devotion to the Hive one of their chief weapons?
Just paint the neked parts
Skin tight would make em no different to gloved hands.
Skin tight would make em no different to gloved hands.
I do that, but the wrist plate on GC not only makes them look far better, it looks good on pretty much all Imperial models, meshing well with full range from IG to Tempestus and Astartes. Naked hand/"glove" just looks silly on later two, requiring fiddling with greenstuff. Which is a shame as tech-look of weapons would be amazing on both Primaris and DW, two factions I am most interested in
Wow they look sweet. I might get two boxes or so for well... well because they would make cool guardsmen/acolytes/assassins/imperial figure stand-ins...
Dual wielding plasma pistols? Either that's amazing courage, or greatly improved tech (well, considering how sci-fi their armor is, I'm betting on non-self-immolating plasma pistols )
Crimson wrote: It is clearly visible on the video at 20 second mark. And yes, bald, so?
I am pretty sure I saw more female looking heads on most male Eldar/Elf minis. So, yeah, close but no cigar.
In fact, if someone told me it was filed down Dark Eldar head I'd say the sculptor messed up the proportions. "She" has same jaw as her colleagues and way too thick brow...
jake wrote: I'm pretty sure the bald one is a female head. I'm hoping theres a second alt one on the sprue so there are some options.
I do too, though on second view, it's even worse, half of face masks seem to have beards on them (funny how the guys seem to be somehow immune to radiation) making them even less useful in conversions.
Actually, between these and Orlocks, it really looks like Necromunda lost their STC for scissors
. And they look cool 
One does wonder how much time 
People used to say that Mordheim Witch Hunters stunk, but I usually had success with them.
I think we should all send them part of a question, but not the whole question, then send the rest of the question in a few weeks. You should let them know that the questions will be released in quarterly amounts but their will be a compilation at the end of the year.
