Voss wrote:I'm not making any threats, let alone 'loaded' ones. (or much about FFG's rules at all, which is why I specified the earlier warhammer RPGs)
I'm stating my own experiences with how long combat takes with different games. Particularly in regards to the idea that a single combat session should/could take an entire night, which to me with a standard RPG and RPG group, is pretty terrible and dull. (again, unless super detailed, 'padded-sumo' combat is the goal)
I must not have come through clearly at all,
lol I would love to go down that path but I was just saying it's a rabbit hole, it's all good man. I.e. just how worthwhile existing
40k RPGs are in the first place. It is a really interesting point though about "high lethality and but low success chances" because I sure as hell don't have the kind of
RPG-wide experience to know how it compares to anything at all. Maybe the low success chances means I/the
GM should be generous about giving bonus chances to hit things and that might help move things along?
kurhanik wrote:It really depends on what you are looking for. Speed specifically I would at least assume Necromunda. I find that combats in the rpgs can drag unless the party knows exactly what they are doing immediately - get someone flip flopping, or a psyker yolo pushing and rolling psychic phenomena every turn, followed by checking injury tables if applicable, and so on and you can have individual turns eating up tons of time. On the flip side, you get a lot more detail and levers to pull to make some truly unique encounters.
It also depends on how much out of combat stuff you want to have, as I am unsure how well Necromunda is with that, while in the rpgs most things you do can be fairly easily given to a skill. Of course, you can easily then run into the problem of most of the players rolling up bureaucrats with zero combat skills for your big fights.
Yeah that's the thing, I want to be able to have combat anywhere/at any time, but I also want to represent even some key non-combat situations with miniatures. So it'll be pure
RPG style on that 'higher/zoomed-out' level hex map, and then - combat or no - represent the campaign via terrain and models when the group reaches a choice hex that they want to really spend some time in or would otherwise benefit from that level of detail. We can come up with light and easy
RPG rules to append to Necromunda but the problem with those Necromunda rules is just how baked-in all the hand-wavy post-battle sequences are, etc. Still not 100% sure how I want to approach it, but I've been leaning towards just making a massive 'errata' or something...
You know, or just throw every single Necromunda rulebook etc. out the window and go with an
RPG for an
RPG set on Necromunda. Sigh.
H.B.M.C. wrote:The only time I've found combat tedious in the 40k RPGs was when:
1. We were play-testing Dark Heresy 2.0. Be thankful the combat rules from the original version of that game never made it to print. Jesus H. Christ that combat took forever.
2. When I was GM'ing games of Deathwatch, an RPG that is basically "Easy Mode" when you don't prepare encounters as Marines in that game are so damned tough.
That's funny, I heard play-testing for
DH 2.0 was actually way better than what came out? I guess it ultimately wasn't
lol. Might be interesting to learn of it though.
You are making me wonder though, could the new
RPG (
https://cubicle7games.com/blog/Warhammer-40000-Roleplay-Imperium-Maledictum) coming out actually be as good if not better than
DH 2.0 rules? I always heard 2.0 beats 1.0 Rogue Trader etc. any day of the week (mostly). For a campaign in 2023 though, I'm still thinking old 2015 Rogue Trader/
DH RPG rules...
That sounds kind of fun if they really represented Deathwatch etc. with the truly obliterating power of Astartes though. You could always just double the # of enemies if it was easy though, yeah?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:You don’t need to use Rules for Models to have RPG Battles using Models.
A nicely crafted 3D board does add to TTRPG games, as it adds “real life” type visuals and what have you. But all you really need do is either set your range conversion, if the RPG uses them, or do a Kill Team and don’t worry about it too much.
If you really want to create range considerations, just declare stuff like Pistols - 12” max, Rifle equivalents 24”, man portable heavy weapons 36” etc, and apply evenly.
Siiiigh....I hate how right you are. It's just the Necromunda rules are SO vast and wonderful and already roleplay-esque, I really hate to just throw them all out the window. But yeah, using all Necromunda models and terrain is still 110% applicable in an
RPG, of course. It's just a lot of rules converting/devising my own personal
RPG rules-book and that...might take some work? Has anyone else heard of anyone else doing something crazy like that?
What do you mean 'do a Kill Team' and don't worry about it too much?
I think both Necromunda and other
40k RPGs use range considerations etc. built in, so I don't think there's an issue there right? To me it's mostly just a matter of time, and getting the right focus. I want to focus on the narrative, but we need to have some out of combat rules etc. Level of detail is absolutely delicious and delightful but a model-heavy 'two-layer' hex/terrain setup like I've mentioned is probably going to come with a fair bit of time as-is, right? Genuine question
lol.