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.

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.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
The way I see it is:

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, GW should 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.

It's no more competitive than Necromunda. The teams are all imbalanced and proudly so

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
The way I see it is:

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, GW should 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.

They simply haven't made that clear "since day one". Has it even been properly confirmed yet?

Still doesn't change the fact that N17 is incomplete, poorly-proofed, missing rules and being released at a glacial pace.

Policing people's disappointment seems a fruitless task, tbh, but each to their own.

 Dysartes wrote:

 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.”

 Theophony wrote:

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).

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
The way I see it is:

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, GW should 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.

Vorian wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
The way I see it is:

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, GW should 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.

 Yodhrin wrote:

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.

"Play a different game" isn't option four. It's a cop-out.

 Theophony wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 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.

But is it? Is it fantastic?

It's a fan set of rules written by a group of people that have a specific view on how the game should be played. What if I disagree with that?

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.

Agree 100%.

 Yodhrin wrote:


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).

Hopefully you aren’t putting that collected document out there for others to download.

Maybe the griping could go to it's own thread and leave this one for....News and Rumors?

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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
But is it? Is it fantastic?

It's a fan set of rules written by a group of people that have a specific view on how the game should be played. What if I disagree with that?

I dunno... you'll reply to an opinion as if I was stating a fact in a bait-y attempt to start an argument

I'm kidding. You're perfectly entitled to disagree with an opinion. My opinion is that NCE IS fantastic. YMMV. And that's fine!

 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.

 gorgon wrote:

 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.