Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
|
2017/12/13 15:37:03
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot
|
I think we should start a spreadsheet compiling the prices for all of these weapons, and which book to find them in.
|
|
|
|
|
2017/12/13 15:50:06
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Yodhrin wrote:Honestly I wouldn't expect any of these kinds of issues to get fixed going forward, on the stream the other day Andy seemed perfectly happy with "meh, everything's in one of the books we've published somewhere"(obviously I'm paraphrasing) as a response to "why isn't this or that in the rulebook/legacy/GW1 as well" type questions.
Which is exactly why I won't be spending a penny on the new rules until they collect everything into a single volume.
Yes in my eyes this release (while good) is a complete mess. Which is exactly why I am compiling and correcting everything in to one single document.
However, making a single document form multiple mutually inconsistent documents is a challenge.
Specially when they introduce things like Boltgun1, Boltgun2, Boltgun3.
|
|
|
|
2017/12/13 17:01:31
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot
|
Baxx wrote: Yodhrin wrote:Honestly I wouldn't expect any of these kinds of issues to get fixed going forward, on the stream the other day Andy seemed perfectly happy with "meh, everything's in one of the books we've published somewhere"(obviously I'm paraphrasing) as a response to "why isn't this or that in the rulebook/legacy/GW1 as well" type questions.
Which is exactly why I won't be spending a penny on the new rules until they collect everything into a single volume.
Yes in my eyes this release (while good) is a complete mess. Which is exactly why I am compiling and correcting everything in to one single document.
However, making a single document form multiple mutually inconsistent documents is a challenge.
Specially when they introduce things like Boltgun1, Boltgun2, Boltgun3.
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking.
If a Spreadsheet, you could do something like:
BOLTERS
-Bolter 1 <cost> <Sourcebook>
-Bolter 2 <cost> <Sourcebook>
I think adding the rules (S, AP, etc) would break GW's rules.
|
|
|
|
|
2017/12/13 17:06:20
Subject: Re:Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
|
Guess I won't prioritizing picking up the rules.
|
Do you play 30k? It'd be a lot cooler if you did. |
|
|
|
2017/12/13 19:35:55
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests
Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.
|
Maybe GW could put a 'Trading Post' PDF up on the Necromunda site as a kind of 'living' document as books come out.
|
|
|
|
|
2017/12/13 19:59:40
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
[MOD]
Decrepit Dakkanaut
Cozy cockpit of an Imperial Knight
|
I'm keeping a trading post document of my own for the time being, using the prices listed in the GW book. I'll be adding these as more books are released, this should make our own campaign a bit easier to keep track of.
|
Fatum Iustum Stultorum
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
|
|
|
|
2017/12/13 21:11:16
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Stone Bonkers Fabricator General
We'll find out soon enough eh.
|
H.B.M.C. wrote:Maybe GW could put a 'Trading Post' PDF up on the Necromunda site as a kind of 'living' document as books come out.
But then people might not buy all the Gang Wars, defeating the purpose of splitting the content in the first place. I doubt they'll put out combined documents for anything unless & until we get the big compilation book, since they can charge you for that.
|
I need to acquire plastic Skavenslaves, can you help?
I have a blog now, evidently. Featuring the Alternative Mordheim Model Megalist.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal |
|
|
|
2017/12/13 22:12:47
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Based on what we already have learned from Blood Bowl the last year, GW is just gonna keep making a complete mess out of the rules, only fixing it with faqs and erratas.
In a year's time, maybe we get a big compilation book.
In the meantime, I'm gonna make the compilation book for them.
|
|
|
|
2017/12/13 22:44:23
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
|
Baxx wrote:GW is just gonna keep making a complete mess out of the rules, only fixing it with faqs and erratas.
Yeah it seems worse to me because it's in the boxed game and then the at release dlc. What would it cost to get it right the first time I wonder?
Glad I decided to wait.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/13 22:45:14
Do you play 30k? It'd be a lot cooler if you did. |
|
|
|
2017/12/13 22:48:35
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Most Glorious Grey Seer
|
Infantryman wrote:I think we should start a spreadsheet compiling the prices for all of these weapons, and which book to find them in.
I've got my own spreadsheet listing all the weapons in the game (so far), their stats, and their cost. Cost is listed separately by Trading post and each house. There's a lot of data missing, unfortunately, and the formatting is a little... raw.
I made the spreadsheet with Excel 2002 so you'll need a compatible viewer.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=14MVZaGM4ZJj5M0ScydqP9j3MuGEWJM21
Let me know if there are any errors and I'll try to get it updated within a day or two.
SECOND EDIT: Changed link to my Google drive. Let me know if there are any problems accessing it.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/12/15 00:29:11
|
|
|
|
2017/12/14 20:35:58
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
[MOD]
Decrepit Dakkanaut
Cozy cockpit of an Imperial Knight
|
So, when a Juve becomes a champion, does that mean that the model can now also finally get some armour?
|
Fatum Iustum Stultorum
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
|
|
|
|
2017/12/14 22:28:04
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Foxy Wildborne
|
BrookM wrote:So, when a Juve becomes a champion, does that mean that the model can now also finally get some armour?
Armour is a class of wargear and Champions have no wargear restrictions, so yes, in theory. In practice, there are no purchasable Armour items listed in any armoury.
|
Posters on ignore list: 36
40k Potica Edition - 40k patch with reactions, suppression and all that good stuff. Feedback thread here.
Gangs of Nu Ork - Necromunda / Gorkamorka expansion supporting all faction. Feedback thread here. |
|
|
|
2017/12/14 22:42:10
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
[MOD]
Decrepit Dakkanaut
Cozy cockpit of an Imperial Knight
|
Here's hoping that a future GW book allows for the purchase of armour, until then it'll have to be a suit of under armour whatever it is called when they grow up.
|
Fatum Iustum Stultorum
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
|
|
|
|
2017/12/15 00:21:34
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Most Glorious Grey Seer
|
Could someone test the share I posted above? I want to make sure it works. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
2017/12/15 01:19:03
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Inspiring SDF-1 Bridge Officer
|
Breotan wrote:Could someone test the share I posted above? I want to make sure it works. Thanks.
Works for me
|
|
|
|
2017/12/15 03:09:40
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Most Glorious Grey Seer
|
Awesome. I'll keep it updated as new books are published.
|
|
|
|
|
2017/12/15 22:02:56
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Breotan wrote:
I made the spreadsheet with Excel 2002 so you'll need a compatible viewer.
Let me know if there are any errors and I'll try to get it updated within a day or two.
SECOND EDIT: Changed link to my Google drive. Let me know if there are any problems accessing it.
Nice!
I did something similar, except I couldn't get a nice layout to get the tables side-by side like you did, so I split them up. I also added the equipment from Legends pdf and the chainsword from Gor Half-horn (pages 21 and 35).
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1nh6JvJ6HuKQLW_x5Vf5CgY5H04dHQ5Kwv_zJebZaOlE
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/12/17 22:46:11
|
|
|
|
2018/01/06 20:23:57
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Violent Enforcer
|
Amazing!
Although there still are some unclear rules (such as how to distribute CC attacks for a fighter with two pistols) and questionable sectioning (such if Fighters in Hiding. should apply to only 2D or also 3D) even in this excellent edition - this is *exactly* how it should have been done by GW/ FW!
The original rules are a total and utter mess so this (I downloaded it as a PDF) will be beyond value - we are talking real Mung vase appraisal - for our campaign!
Keep up the good work - and hopefully Andy Hoare and crew will see and understand how to write rules!
PS. Made you a ”Dakka Contributing Member” as a small token of my appreciation
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/06 20:27:04
|
|
|
|
2018/01/07 03:41:30
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Stealthy Grot Snipa
|
Flinty wrote:1st edition was the amazing boxed set, which was expanded by Outlanders. 2nd edition, as far as I'm aware, was just a softback rules update to bring the rules a bit more into line with the then current 40k mechanics as well as fiddle with things a bit. Then it went Specialist games only and there was probably some community footling.
Am I missing anything major?
See Yaktribe for the hella tight Community Edition update to the Original Rulebook / Living Rulebook from Games Workshop. Sort of obsolete for modern Necromunda play, but great nonetheless.
|
|
|
|
|
2018/01/07 21:48:37
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
kendoka wrote: Amazing! Although there still are some unclear rules (such as how to distribute CC attacks for a fighter with two pistols) and questionable sectioning (such if Fighters in Hiding. should apply to only 2D or also 3D) even in this excellent edition - this is *exactly* how it should have been done by GW/ FW! The original rules are a total and utter mess so this (I downloaded it as a PDF) will be beyond value - we are talking real Mung vase appraisal - for our campaign! Keep up the good work - and hopefully Andy Hoare and crew will see and understand how to write rules! PS. Made you a ”Dakka Contributing Member” as a small token of my appreciation
Thanks alot! I just discovered someone else did the exact same thing as me. Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/necromunda/comments/7er2y8/necromunda_underhive_rules_transcript_en/ Pdf link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L19AaQmIxlDvvX17e7AAle_J0TvTbb7T/view Interesting to see we made many of the same choices: -discarded the outdated scenarios from the Underhive book (Underhive scenarios are incompatible with campaign, Gang War 1 scenarios are compatible with both single game and campaign) -discarded the dumbed down dead demo house lists of Underhive (incompatible with Gang War 1 and superseded by it from day one) -discarded demo skill list in Underhive (incompatible with Gang War 1 and superseded by it from day one) -used prices and stats from Gang War 1 instead of Underhive (also superseded) -discarded the pre-filled cards not compatible with Underhive house lists nor Gang War 1 house lists (only for demo purposes). This pretty much proves my point about the incompatible systems of gang creation that GW has confused us with.
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/01/07 22:35:47
|
|
|
|
2018/01/08 07:58:50
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests
Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.
|
So you finally admit that the stuff in the rulebook was superseded by the GW stuff, and isn't a "different version" of Necromunda.
|
|
|
|
|
2018/01/08 11:08:47
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Violent Enforcer
|
H.B.M.C. wrote:So you finally admit that the stuff in the rulebook was superseded by the GW stuff, and isn't a "different version" of Necromunda.
IMHO: This (the whole argument regarding "Demo"/"Outdated") is just semantics.
We all share the same opinion regarding the problems associated with how the rules were split.
Baxx, not being a native English speaker, (as mee) may word it different/wrong - but there is no real reason to fuel that pointless debate further.
|
|
|
|
2018/01/08 12:53:35
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
H.B.M.C. wrote:So you finally admit that the stuff in the rulebook was superseded by the GW stuff, and isn't a "different version" of Necromunda.
I may just as well have called it a system.
|
|
|
|
2018/01/12 21:49:09
Subject: Re:Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Angelic Adepta Sororitas
|
So how do I buy mesh armour for my leader, how much does it cost, and how does it work?
|
|
|
|
|
2018/02/06 19:35:11
Subject: Re:Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Casbyness wrote:So how do I buy mesh armour for my leader, how much does it cost, and how does it work?
Good question, unfortunately no one knows. There's no rules for it.
The new Gang War 2 solves some of the problems by replacing all previous weapon stats, but it also introduces a bunch of new problems like:
-Stub Gun no longer has Pistol trait?
-Shock Whip no longer Versatile?
-Brute Cleaver no longer an option?
I guess Games Workshop / Forge World didn't want to release a faq/errata pdf before Gang War 2, since Gang War 2 potentially could solve some of the issues. But we still very much need that faq/errata, except now also covering the mistakes made in Gang War 2. The chaos continues...
|
|
|
|
2018/02/06 23:27:23
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests
Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.
|
Don't the rules for the axe mirror the brute cleaver (including the 'Disarm' ability)?
|
|
|
|
|
2018/02/07 03:02:17
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Most Glorious Grey Seer
|
H.B.M.C. wrote:Don't the rules for the axe mirror the brute cleaver (including the 'Disarm' ability)?
The weapon profiles for the Axe and Brute Cleaver are as below.
Axe:
| - | E | - | - | +1 | - | 1 | - | Disarm, Melee
Brute Cleaver:
| - | E | - | +1 | S | -1 | 1 | - | Disarm, Melee
As for the Brute Cleaver not being an option on p30 of GW2 (Underhive Armory), it's most likely they just forgot about it and copied their data from the Trading Post of the previous book which also did not have the Brute Cleaver listed.
EDIT: I've updated my weapons spreadsheet. I should have all weapons available in the game listed, along with points cost. I've left the missing traits on the Stub Gun and Shock Whip as their omission is an obvious error.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1VLCPtNqTDRzzI15t1xmyHZ71_sbOWr9M
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/02/07 03:57:24
|
|
|
|
2018/02/07 07:21:19
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Nice work! It is the best presentation of the data. I'm still quite amazed GW went with separate house-prices per weapon (seeing as they messed it up at least on one occasion). I forgot that the same weapons were not in GW1. I'm not so sure the starter box rulebook (and a few of the weapons there) were even permanent. Maybe Brute Cleaver and Spud-jacker was a mistake? Maybe it was something done in the last minute, forced upon the rule writers by the miniature designers, and later silently omitted? How many additional Gang War armories can we get without these weapons and still think they're in the game?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/07 07:22:06
|
|
|
|
2018/02/09 16:56:50
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Most Glorious Grey Seer
|
Baxx wrote:Nice work! It is the best presentation of the data. I'm still quite amazed GW went with separate house-prices per weapon (seeing as they messed it up at least on one occasion). I forgot that the same weapons were not in GW1. I'm not so sure the starter box rulebook (and a few of the weapons there) were even permanent. Maybe Brute Cleaver and Spud-jacker was a mistake? Maybe it was something done in the last minute, forced upon the rule writers by the miniature designers, and later silently omitted? How many additional Gang War armories can we get without these weapons and still think they're in the game?
First thing to remember is that Forge World has never been known for writing great rules. In the past they've been masters of "cut & paste", publishing trial rules as finished, and even contradictory rules and stats within the same book. Don't even get me started about the lack of proofreading. This silliness is still there in the current Blood Bowl, although to a much lesser extent. If things are missing it's most likely because someone at FW wasn't paying attention. This may be why Spud-jackers aren't listed in the armory. Then again, it's possible that FW intended each gang to have their own house armory with in the gang section of the rulebook but never got around to it or otherwise dropped the ball on it before publication. I don't see this changing until the almanac, if then. Silliness like this is the main impetus for me creating the weapons spreadsheet. I think part of the issue with house prices being different from the trading post is that FW wanted to have some weapons be associated with specific houses. This is a stylistic choice meant to differentiate gangs meaning other houses have to pay more for a given weapon or perhaps the weapon isn't even listed in the traiding post at all. For example, Eschers get lasguns on the cheap but pay through the nose for a shotgun. Want a Stub Cannon? You better enjoy playing Goliaths. Honestly, I'm fine with this. In previous editions, the only real difference between gangs seemed to be which skill tree they could roll on.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/09 16:57:18
|
|
|
|
2018/02/21 17:19:58
Subject: Necromunda rule inconsistencies
|
|
Fresh-Faced New User
|
We have been using the trading post costs from a previous rules edition.
It was a simpler solution that trying to figure out which book or pdf had the correct information (or in some cases missing all together).
Hopefully the rumored FAQ will clear up these problems.
|
|
|
|
|