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.

Cool. It’s good to hear that people are running successful campaigns and having a good time, even if the release has been mishandled.

I wouldn't say Necromunda is a disaster. I would definitely say it's an over bloated mess in the way it is being handled though.

I will say, I was so excited when N17 was announced, and until recently bought everything, but it's just too cumbersome to play in it's current incarnation. I only get to do any gaming about once a month, and having to flip across four books of rules with conflicting item profiles and too many ambiguous sections just threw me off. If I had an opportunity to play weekly, maybe it would be more interesting, but as is, I sold off all my stuff.

That said, the core rules of the game are fantastic (my favorite ruleset GW has minus Blood Bowl) and it's a really fun game, at the moment it's just too messy and time consuming to play. Now, if a single compiled rulebook comes out that has been proofread (which I'm sure will happen), I'll happily pick it back up, because the core system is great, but the way the rules have been released is just a pain.

When there are conflicting profiles, why not just use the most recent one?

 Sqorgar wrote:
When there are conflicting profiles, why not just use the most recent one?

I'm not saying you can't do that, but you have four people playing a game and one person has a different profile for a weapon in the book their gang is in than the profile for the weapon in their opponent's book, and said people rarely get to play the game and are thus not super familiar with it, it can cause confusion. I'm guessing you are probably aware of the fairly long community FAQ put out by the fine folks at Yakromunda (if you aren't, it's worth checking out), but the game's rules have lots of contradictions and are really cumbersome because they are spread across so many books. If Necromunda was the only game I played, and I was able to play it more often so that I knew all the intricacies of the rules It would be worth it to continue to play, but as it stands I just can't justify playing Necromunda in the very limited gaming time I have. When our games take us 2.5 hours to play, and almost half of that is looking up omissions or contradictions in the rules, I'd rather just play something else.

Now the game has great bones (as I said It's core rules are some of the best GW has ever come up with in my opinion), but it really needs to be consolidated into fewer books and be cleaned up for me to get it into my rotation.

Exactly seconded. A Compendium would be so welcome.

 Sabotage! wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
When there are conflicting profiles, why not just use the most recent one?

I'm not saying you can't do that, but you have four people playing a game and one person has a different profile for a weapon in the book their gang is in than the profile for the weapon in their opponent's book, and said people rarely get to play the game and are thus not super familiar with it, it can cause confusion. I'm guessing you are probably aware of the fairly long community FAQ put out by the fine folks at Yakromunda (if you aren't, it's worth checking out), but the game's rules have lots of contradictions and are really cumbersome because they are spread across so many books. If Necromunda was the only game I played, and I was able to play it more often so that I knew all the intricacies of the rules It would be worth it to continue to play, but as it stands I just can't justify playing Necromunda in the very limited gaming time I have. When our games take us 2.5 hours to play, and almost half of that is looking up omissions or contradictions in the rules, I'd rather just play something else.

Now the game has great bones (as I said It's core rules are some of the best GW has ever come up with in my opinion), but it really needs to be consolidated into fewer books and be cleaned up for me to get it into my rotation.

I really would recommend using the Reddit Compilation - it solves everything that you mention AND doesn't require carting around 5 books everywhere (including folding in the Yaktribe FAQ). It's currently being updated with GW4 and the changes from the Gang Leader's Pack

 Sqorgar wrote:
When there are conflicting profiles, why not just use the most recent one?

What is the most recent one when both conflicting profiles are in the same book? The one with the highest page number?

The reason you can't take the most recent one is because the most recent one often makes no sense. For example when they removed Pistol trait from stub gun in GW2. Or versatile from shock whip. There is nothing that indicates that a more recent change is the correct one.

 Sabotage! wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
When there are conflicting profiles, why not just use the most recent one?

I'm not saying you can't do that, but you have four people playing a game and one person has a different profile for a weapon in the book their gang is in than the profile for the weapon in their opponent's book, and said people rarely get to play the game and are thus not super familiar with it, it can cause confusion. I'm guessing you are probably aware of the fairly long community FAQ put out by the fine folks at Yakromunda (if you aren't, it's worth checking out), but the game's rules have lots of contradictions and are really cumbersome because they are spread across so many books. If Necromunda was the only game I played, and I was able to play it more often so that I knew all the intricacies of the rules It would be worth it to continue to play, but as it stands I just can't justify playing Necromunda in the very limited gaming time I have. When our games take us 2.5 hours to play, and almost half of that is looking up omissions or contradictions in the rules, I'd rather just play something else.

Now the game has great bones (as I said It's core rules are some of the best GW has ever come up with in my opinion), but it really needs to be consolidated into fewer books and be cleaned up for me to get it into my rotation.

I can't argue a negative. So, no way to counter your assertions as stated. Specifically, the limitations with which you frame the discussion: a necessary lack of familiarity with the rules, and limited playing time. And, those are certainly legitimate considerations. And, obviously, rules spread over 5 books is no one's ideal (I really thought they were coming to an end of that nonsense, until they left the actual psychic powers out of the psychic rules in the otherwise quite useful Gang War 4). I get your frustrations. And, I sympathize.

It's now a big, damn game! It has complete (and, different) rules for two completely different settings. Now, two completely different campaigns. Five, going on six completely different core gangs with unique rules (plus, three more unique magazine gangs). And continuously adds (and, revises) new rules for new stuff (new campaign, Hired Guns, psychics, etc.). And, yes, it has had continuity issues, and it is not a perfect product.

That said, throwing out the baby with the bathwater isn't a solution. It's a dissolution. The solution? Go back to basics. Simplify. At its core, the box set is a complete game. And, a VERY good one. Heck, if that box set had not been a revival of the original, it would be an outstanding stand alone game. Add in the campaign, and the 3D setting, and you have a fully functional revival. The more they add (for better or worse), the bigger and more interesting becomes the game. No one would recommend to a Newb learn to play 40K by buying EVERY codex and alternate setting expansion. Take it from one who endured nearly 2 decades of NO game support. These ARE Necromunda's good old days.

Again, I do sympathize.

 ArbitorIan wrote:

Personally, I bought the rulebook and basic cards/dice from a friend's second set, and bought GW1, and then stopped buying. I've been using the Reddit Compilation (which basically lays out the rules in an easy-to-follow way) since then. I'm totally up for buying a BB-style 'Annual' if they release one, but I don't want to have to cart loads of books around.

Our campaign has been running pretty smoothly, and we restrict which GW we're working with each Turf War - so the next Turf War starts in August, which will be the first time we use GW3 and GW4. That way some people aren't fighting with GW2 rules against someone with surprise GW4 weapons, etc etc. We've had about 20 people playing consistently since the start of the year with a single FB group to manage any issues.

My personal story is very different. I bought every single product they slapped the label "Necromunda" on and then some.

Our campaign has been running smoothly, but we had a different approach, adding all new contents on the fly. So whenever a new GW book is out, armoury, trading post and scenarios are extended. For example last week my Genestealer Cult gang got turned completely up-side down with the new GSC version 2 pdf. We've been running a single turf war consistently, but only 4-5 players on average. Some of us doesn't even have Facebook

I just had to mention it because most elements you mentioned was almost completely opposite in my case xD

 Fifty wrote:
I think both will last a long time.

Kill Team had a strong potential to be played competetively, and even if it is not well-balanced right now, it could easily be adjusted.

Necromunda had a strong following whilst completely unsupported and it has picked up even more now. It might not be popular where you are, but in London, for example, I know of several groups playing it regularly at clubs and FLGSs.

I have to ask, how is a game getting quarterly new releases unsupported?

stratigo wrote:

 Fifty wrote:
I think both will last a long time.

Kill Team had a strong potential to be played competetively, and even if it is not well-balanced right now, it could easily be adjusted.

Necromunda had a strong following whilst completely unsupported and it has picked up even more now. It might not be popular where you are, but in London, for example, I know of several groups playing it regularly at clubs and FLGSs.

I have to ask, how is a game getting quarterly new releases unsupported?

hes referring to the roughly 20 year period between the new necromunda dnt he old one, when plenty of people still played.

 Gobbla wrote:
I get your frustrations. And, I sympathize.

It's now a big, damn game! It has complete (and, different) rules for two completely different settings. Now, two completely different campaigns. Five, going on six completely different core gangs with unique rules (plus, three more unique magazine gangs). And continuously adds (and, revises) new rules for new stuff (new campaign, Hired Guns, psychics, etc.). And, yes, it has had continuity issues, and it is not a perfect product.

That said, throwing out the baby with the bathwater isn't a solution. It's a dissolution. The solution? Go back to basics. Simplify. At its core, the box set is a complete game. And, a VERY good one. Heck, if that box set had not been a revival of the original, it would be an outstanding stand alone game. Add in the campaign, and the 3D setting, and you have a fully functional revival. The more they add (for better or worse), the bigger and more interesting becomes the game. No one would recommend to a Newb learn to play 40K by buying EVERY codex and alternate setting expansion. Take it from one who endured nearly 2 decades of NO game support. These ARE Necromunda's good old days.

Again, I do sympathize.

I appreciate your understanding. I also like your suggestions on simplifying the game play. When GW eventually put out a book for the game that has all six core gangs, campaign rules, a complete armory, and a standard line-up of scenarios, I'll totally pick it up and play the game once more. It may not have all the different environmental rules, will certainly have less hired gun rules, and will definitely have less scenarios, but that's okay to me. I really just want a well edited single rulebook with the basics of the game - I didn't get to play enough to come close to even experience all of those! If I decide to expand beyond that, it's nice to have the option to go pick up one of the GW books or a further expansion. But with things as dispersed as they are, and my inability to play the game regularly, I'll probably just stick with the other games I have until we get the Necromunda Annual (or whatever it will be called).

Also, thank you Arbitorian for the suggestion on the reddit compilation, that seems like a good stop gap until we get a compendium of some sort.

I do want to add that I think at it's core this is a very cool game. Each gang having different profiles and different weapons access, along with really engaging core rules make this a great game, I think it just needs to be cleaned up to allow more people to access it.

While the rules for Necromunda 2017 are a lot of fun, the rulebooks are a total mess. From what I understand, the project lead on Necromunda 2017 left before it was finished and then the bean counters insisted on rushing it to release. The chap himself did a Reddit AMA that makes it sound like tight deadlines and a lack of resources were an issue. As for the staggered release schedule for gang rules, Andy Hoare mentioned on a recent Warhammer TV stream that the rationale behind the quarterly releases was that they wanted to make the rules to match the miniatures rather than vice versa. I guess this gives them more headroom for wargear etc with their whole "no miniatures, no rules" thing -- I assume they couldn't do proper foreplanning with the rushed release.

I really hope they do a revised compendium of the rules, because the game is great, but with the current books it is a bit of pain when you can't find the rules you're looking for, or something's missing or doesn't quite make sense. Also I don't want to carry around 5 books

 nurgle5 wrote:
While the rules for Necromunda 2017 are a lot of fun, the rulebooks are a total mess. From what I understand, the project lead on Necromunda 2017 left before it was finished and then the bean counters insisted on rushing it to release. The chap himself did a Reddit AMA that makes it sound like tight deadlines and a lack of resources were an issue. As for the staggered release schedule for gang rules, Andy Hoare mentioned on a recent Warhammer TV stream that the rationale behind the quarterly releases was that they wanted to make the rules to match the miniatures rather than vice versa. I guess this gives them more headroom for wargear etc with their whole "no miniatures, no rules" thing -- I assume they couldn't do proper foreplanning with the rushed release.

Yeah, Underhive (the boxed game) was apparently designed as a stand-alone product (like Shadow Wars) but the higher-ups decided they could get more money out of it. Retailers were promised continued support in the form of a new gang & book every quarter for 'at least' 18 months, and we're at the halfway point now.

Baxx wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
When there are conflicting profiles, why not just use the most recent one?

What is the most recent one when both conflicting profiles are in the same book? The one with the highest page number?

The reason you can't take the most recent one is because the most recent one often makes no sense. For example when they removed Pistol trait from stub gun in GW2. Or versatile from shock whip. There is nothing that indicates that a more recent change is the correct one.

It is not so difficult. Pick the version which makes most sense and stick with it.

 Strg Alt wrote:

Baxx wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
When there are conflicting profiles, why not just use the most recent one?

What is the most recent one when both conflicting profiles are in the same book? The one with the highest page number?

The reason you can't take the most recent one is because the most recent one often makes no sense. For example when they removed Pistol trait from stub gun in GW2. Or versatile from shock whip. There is nothing that indicates that a more recent change is the correct one.

It is not so difficult. Pick the version which makes most sense and stick with it.

you're asking too much now from these people...

ValentineGames wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

Baxx wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
When there are conflicting profiles, why not just use the most recent one?

What is the most recent one when both conflicting profiles are in the same book? The one with the highest page number?

The reason you can't take the most recent one is because the most recent one often makes no sense. For example when they removed Pistol trait from stub gun in GW2. Or versatile from shock whip. There is nothing that indicates that a more recent change is the correct one.

It is not so difficult. Pick the version which makes most sense and stick with it.

you're asking too much now from these people...

Yeah spending an hour before every game comparing Gang War books to determine all of the differences and deciding on how to play them before the game just adds to the fun!

Seriously, GW has done a lot of good things in the past two years, 8th Ed and KillTeam are two examples I enjoy. The rule release style and quality (or lack thereof) for Necromunda 2017 is not an example of this.

I don't find it hard (all my mates have every book and we all play that the latest book has the correct rules for the weapons, rules etc, it's not rocket science). We have found the game very enjoyable. The staggered release can be seen as a pain in the ass at the start but if you are playing developing campaigns it is not to bad. I can't wait til they release an entire almanac but atm the staggered release gives me a chance to buy every gang/dice/cards etc in a realistic time frame and still enjoy the game.

 vonjankmon wrote:
Yeah spending an hour before every game comparing Gang War books to determine all of the differences and deciding on how to play them before the game just adds to the fun!

Seriously, GW has done a lot of good things in the past two years, 8th Ed and KillTeam are two examples I enjoy. The rule release style and quality (or lack thereof) for Necromunda 2017 is not an example of this.

Yup, as everyone has pointed out, the style of release of rules, the spreading out of rules, and the errors are annoying.

But, also has been repeatedly pointed out, this has been solved by the community - both by Yaktribe and by the Reddit Compilation. If you're spending an hour before each game figuring out the correct rules, that's your choice.

ValentineGames wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

It is not so difficult. Pick the version which makes most sense and stick with it.

you're asking too much now from these people...

By "these people" are you referring to me? If so, please tell me what makes most sense, a Str 2 Rad gun or Str 3.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spectral Ceramite wrote:
I don't find it hard (all my mates have every book and we all play that the latest book has the correct rules for the weapons, rules etc, it's not rocket science).

You played stub guns as not having Pistol Trait back in March? Cause that makes no sense.

 vonjankmon wrote:

This thread is a small representation of the problem GW created with their rules release style for Necromunda. I do not believe I am alone in avoiding the new Necromunda because of how they have been releasing the rules.

I was super excited when they announced the new Necromunda. I loved the new miniatures. I preorder the box set as soon as it was up for order, along with the first Gang War book.


As I heard what their release plans were. As I head how lame each GW book was. I decided to put the game aside, and wait for them to release a compilation book with all the material in one place. Their screwed up marketing of necromunda killed my excitement, that's for sure.

 mdauben wrote:

 vonjankmon wrote:

This thread is a small representation of the problem GW created with their rules release style for Necromunda. I do not believe I am alone in avoiding the new Necromunda because of how they have been releasing the rules.

I was super excited when they announced the new Necromunda. I loved the new miniatures. I preorder the box set as soon as it was up for order, along with the first Gang War book.


As I heard what their release plans were. As I head how lame each GW book was. I decided to put the game aside, and wait for them to release a compilation book with all the material in one place. Their screwed up marketing of necromunda killed my excitement, that's for sure.

Funny enough the gang war books actually kinda improved with each passing one. So far gang war 3 looks to be the most solid one. Gang war 4 came close but has a couple niggling issues. It's a very fun game to play, but sticking with the basics seems to be the best idea, for now. Luckily adeptus titanicus hasn't been hit with the same issues. However James Hewitt I believe designed the core rules for both games (he left the company). Now they have new people in there writing rules and they might not even have the same grasp on the the rules as the creator. So even the future of AT is going to be questionable if they can't get proper writers and proofreaders to make sure these books stop being so sloppy.