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.

Are there any rules you Necromunda players like to use at home that help your campaigns to run better or just make the games more interesting?

for instance, We always felt that the Xp bonus per wounding hit could get excessive so we always capped it at 3 hits per character per game.

but perhaps one of my all time favorite house rules was this little table for bored juves post game. Ganger's collect income, the leader does trading, the heavy "maintains the gangs gear"( this is nonsense as my gangs that didn't include a heavy never suffered from any poorly maintained gear) but juves... they can't do any of this, so now they can do...

JUVE CAPERS!!!

Getting into trouble is a fulltime occupation for juves. Any juve who wasn't taken out of action in the previous game can (but does not have to--the leader can ground them) get into trouble.

Roll 2D6

2: What Happened to you?: This time around, the juve bit off a little more than he could chew, and someone (or something) taught him a lesson. Immediately roll on the serious injury chart, but treat a captured result as a full recovery.

3-4: Drunk and Disorderly: He obviously did something wrong (although he can’t remember what), because he woke up and found himself in the local Sheriff’s lockup. He misses the next game unless you can cough up 2D6 creds bail money.

5: loose lips: The juve was shooting his mouth off where the wrong type of people could hear him. Your opponent gets to choose YOUR next scenario choice.

6-7: Quiet Night: Nothing of interest Happens. (Booo!)

8-9: Smalltime Caper: The juve manages to “acquire” 2D6 credits. These credits go directly to your stash.

10-11: An Adventure!: God only knows what the juve has been up to, but he gains D6xp.

12: What’s That?: The juve comes back to base with a strange piece of Archeotech. Your heavy (if you have one) can figure out what it does. Roll on the Archeotech table (from Outlanders). If you know what it is you can keep it and use it, or alternatively you can sell it.

We just started our campaign, but when one member rolled up a power axe, we agreed to let them take a power-sword instead as it would be closer to WYSIWYG for the Escher models he had.

It's not exactly a "House Rule" but we chose the Yaktribe Necromunda Community Edition (NCE) as our ruleset of choice because it seemed to incorporate alot of tweaks and adjustments that would make the campaign run better and did so more comprehensively than we would have done by house-ruling as issues arose.

Haha I love your Juve Capers chart. Really fun.

Recently I have liked to play straight out the books, but I am contemplating the following house rule to eliminate fire arc abuses:

1. Models can target an enemy within their 90* degree arc.
2. Once targeted, pivot the firing model to face the target directly.
3. If there is an enemy model closer now within the fire arc, that model must be targeted instead.

The idea is to make a concrete way to stop players angling their models to avoid shooting the closest target.

That's possible but perhaps a bit convoluted. I see your thinking and I can't think of any more simple sollution.
Interestingly I've never had this issue but maybe it's because we never really stricktly considered the firing arcs.

What if you drop the firing arcs altogether (or keep them only for overwatch or individuals with multiple shots like gunfighters) that way closest target is closest target regardless. 9 times out of 10 it'll have the desired effect and keep the game rolling without too many rules.

I definitely want to keep the fire arcs. I think always having to shoot at the closest target regardless of fire arcs could lead to some dodgey situations where a juve on one flank is forcing you target it rather than a valuable target on other simply because it's closer.

The less convulted alternative is:

1. See a player abusing fire arc rules.
2. Frown sternly

:-p

We just did away with fire arcs, and found it didn't really affect the game that much.


The big one, because we're all impatient for our gangs to get good, is to roll advances when setting up a new gang as if your starting XP was an increase from 0. Helps remove those first few boring games when nobody is any good at doing anything...


We also capped weapons, just to avoid silliness... gang members (not hired guns) can have at most one 'rifle' or heavy weapon (heavies can have two), two pistols or close combat weapons, and any number of knives.

 insaniak wrote:
We just did away with fire arcs, and found it didn't really affect the game that much.


The big one, because we're all impatient for our gangs to get good, is to roll advances when setting up a new gang as if your starting XP was an increase from 0. Helps remove those first few boring games when nobody is any good at doing anything...


We also capped weapons, just to avoid silliness... gang members (not hired guns) can have at most one 'rifle' or heavy weapon (heavies can have two), two pistols or close combat weapons, and any number of knives.

Did you also play units must always shoot the closest target then or did you allow anyone to shoot anything? What about for overwatch?

I still think my system could work because in practice we won't have to go through the steps every time. Players will know if they want to shoot at a group of models they will have to shoot the closest member of that group. (Allowing meat shield tactics).

I think there are just so few instances where it really ever happens that you get surrounded like that. And due to the fact that 9 times out of 10 a miniature will move before he shoots the player trends to just point him at his intended target anyway.
Overwatch is the obvious exception of course. You can't disregard firing arcs there.

. But hey, it's your game, do it your way and if it's working for you and everyone's having fun then more power to ya.

 Bottle wrote:
Haha I love your Juve Capers chart. Really fun.

Recently I have liked to play straight out the books, but I am contemplating the following house rule to eliminate fire arc abuses:

1. Models can target an enemy within their 90* degree arc.
2. Once targeted, pivot the firing model to face the target directly.
3. If there is an enemy model closer now within the fire arc, that model must be targeted instead.

The idea is to make a concrete way to stop players angling their models to avoid shooting the closest target.

Pretty sure that's exactly how NCE does it.

It is how the NCE does it, almost verbatim. I think it's just as prone to abuse as the original fire arc rule, though; just by the defender instead of the attacker.

I didn't realise that how the NCE does it, as I've only ever played the original rules (even house weapon lists seem blasphemous to me :-p)

I'd be interested in hearing how it's prone to abuse from the defender.

PS. Sorry for turning this thread into a fire-arc debate.

The scenario that comes to mind is placing a juve slightly closer to the opposing gangers than a more valuable model so that when an attacker turns, the juve is now the closest model in the fire arc. Although the defender would have to make a decent guess regarding what his opponent will do, it wouldn't be that hard to set up.

Another thing we used to do before the house weapons lists came out was extend the range on an autogun by a couple of inches. This was just to give players a reason to choose an autogun over the more reliable for the same price lasgun if they wanted to.

BairdEC wrote:
The scenario that comes to mind is placing a juve slightly closer to the opposing gangers than a more valuable model so that when an attacker turns, the juve is now the closest model in the fire arc. Although the defender would have to make a decent guess regarding what his opponent will do, it wouldn't be that hard to set up.

For me this was the whole point of the 'shoot the closest target' rule as it allows the defending player to use Juves as meat shields.

I just see that as rules abuse of a different variety, but if that's how you and your buddies want to play, have at it. I always figured that if you wanted to use juves as meat shields, you didn't need additional rules to do it; just keep them in front.

What would be the point of having a 'shoot the closest target' rule if it wasn't to allow defenders to stick their valuable units behind lesser and to stop attackers from sniping the prime opposition at the start of the game. For me this seems to be the essence of the RAI

 Bottle wrote:
Haha I love your Juve Capers chart. Really fun.

Recently I have liked to play straight out the books, but I am contemplating the following house rule to eliminate fire arc abuses:

1. Models can target an enemy within their 90* degree arc.
2. Once targeted, pivot the firing model to face the target directly.
3. If there is an enemy model closer now within the fire arc, that model must be targeted instead.

The idea is to make a concrete way to stop players angling their models to avoid shooting the closest target.

Similarly, our house rule was no firing arcs during your shooting phase, 90 degree arc for Overwatch.