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.

Rahveel wrote:For me, I wanted to stick with a GW set of rules, as they tend to be quite similar, and I do not care to learn yet another game from the ground up.

Totally understand that.

Rahveel wrote:
I also feel that a big draw of =][=munda\heim is that its rules are not so set in stone. a lot of flexibility and game play is up to the DM to manage. don’t have rules for vehicles? just use 40k's. any issues that arise from slight discrepancies can be smoothed over by a GM in just a few seconds.

My quest was for a rule set that played well with a GM, but did not require one. A system that had rules for just about everything I needed and a way to build units/weapons/vehicles/etc. One system that I found that did this well was SuperSystem (referred to as S2 from now on.) No issues would arise that were not in the rules themselves (or FAQs/errata) and no need for an arbitrator.

Plus, with the group I was working with, a power framework was necessary. Some were less than level-headed about their gang rosters.

Rahveel wrote:
I also feel that trying to factor 40k stats (both for units and weapons) into a different game system throws off game balance. the (dis)advantages of a weapon with a high rate of fire and a certain strength/range will be skewed in comparison to its ability in another game, with different profiles.

Well, I think that would depend upon the game system. The one that I chose had the ability to create items and units as part of its core. It also has built-in advantages and disadvantages as part of the creation system. I think that I could recreate just about any (dis)advantage in the GW game systems.


That is cool though, like I said, I am not trying to make nay converts (unless some of you happen to be looking for a Supers mini rules set. )

I actually bought all of the 2nd edition 40K Codices so that I could stat out anything I wanted into Necromunda. Which totally contradicts what I said above, I know. But, that is the fickle nature of my gaming group. At least, it was until I moved and no longer really have one, anyway...

~Eric

whereabouts you move to?

and I can see how something like a more solid framework is important to some groups, and can understand the desire to not need a 3rd party. me, I just like GMing, and seeing as I abandoned paper rpgs some time ago, I am glad to have the opportunity to.

I moved from Pittsburgh back to East Cesspool, erm, I mean, East Liverpool, Ohio.

No real gaming presence at all here. I have a few friends who like gaming but it is hard to sit down for long sessions or to get more than one or two of them together at a time.

That is kinda why I was looking for a small scale skirmish game.

I have run many a campaign, and I really would like to be able to just play this time. Even if it means that I do all of the conversion groundwork.

When it comes to rolling the dice I just want to be a player.


~Eric

well, if you happen to convert all the 40k stuff over to S2, post it. dosent hurt to have options!

Dont know if this has been covered - but my buddy and I are working on this:

Vehicles in the Underhive:
Various factions and gangs make use ofsmaller vehicles although they are rare and their costrather prohibative.Bikes and ATVs are the most common form of transport (although enforcers have been known to make use of a rhino variant)

Vehicle Movement:
The underhive is a trecherous place and often ill suited to vehicle use. However some vehicles are to be found in use by various factions. A vehicle can move the distance shown on its profile (in inches), doing so requires that the controlling player must take a dangerous terrain test for the vehicle (the underhive is scattered with sharp and pointy bits after all). This test is done on a single D6 roll with 1's causing damage to the vehicle (see damage chart) If the controlling player wishes the vehicle may move up to twice its movement allowance (in inches), this is a very risky manouver in the rubble strewn underbelly of the hive, a dangerous terrain test needs to be taken on 2D6 with 1's causing damage to the vehicle and possibly passengers as well (see damage chart).

Vehicle moving slowly:
1 - Immobilised (roll damage)
2 - Ok
3 - Ok
4 - Stuck - Passengers to disembark
5 - Immobilised - Passengers to disembark
6 - Vehicle Wrecked - Passengers to disembark (pinned)

Vehicle moving fast:
1 -Immobilised (roll damage)
2 - Ok
3 - Stuck - Passengars to disembark
4 - Stuck - Passengers to disembark (pinned)
5 - Vehicle explodes (D6" ST5)
6 - Vehicle explodes (D6" ST5)

Its a WIP I think the movement charts need work - we sorta mixed the damage in with it...

My thinking is that 1 or 6 = critical

Some damage chart ideas:

1 Engine stalled (cannot move again for 1d6 turns)
2 Engine siezed (cannot move again this game)
3 Engine siezed - all passengers to take smoke / tear-gas damage rolls
4 - Engine explodes - driver KO
5 - Engine explodes - driver KO + all occupants to roll for damage
6 - Engine goes critical - whole vehicle explodes - driver and all occupants KO

Does anyone have any rules for psykers and wyrds from necro?

I'm trying to solidify some rules for =][=munda, but as I don't have a copy of any of the original necro books I don't have any rules for wyrds/psykers and their powers.

Additionally, for anyone that is playing =][=munda atm, what do you do about chaos and imperial psykers? What powers do you give them? As the necro ones were quite 'neutral' from what I can remember.

I'd rather not just make them all up from scratch, so any help would be appreciated!

May be worth checking on the GW website they certainly had a living rulebook for Necromunda on there

Thanks for the help, Llamahead, but unfortunately I've already got the living rulebook and every pdf ever put up on the specialist games website. They never got around to including psykers and wyrds in the new rules, so you still need to use the outlanders book for them. I've tried getting hold of one, but I'm not paying £30 for it. Does anyone have a pdf, or scan of the pages from it? It's OOP, so presumably there wouldn't be an issue with that?

Anyone got the outlanders book?

Hey hey, I do actually have some of the stuff from the old site. GW released the PDF´s themselves, so it should be cool.

Amongst the stuff that I (luckily) downloaded, are the Psyker rules, the rules for ogryns, rules for dogs (yes, really!), rules for a preacher, and rules for a trader warband.

I wish there was a place to put this stuff, it´s clearly not copyrighted, and I can´t understand why GW doesn´t have it on the new site..... :S

Anyways, if people need this, PM me, and we´ll figure something.

(I believe this to be fully legal, if it is not, please delete this post.)

Hi everyone. First Post.

I'm a long time Necromunda Fan, who returned to the Hobby recently with all sorts of crazy Necromunda Ideas, then my brother trapped me into playing 5th edition 40K... but once I've built my 1'500pt Tyranid army I plan to join all this =I=munda madness here on Dakka that has totally inspired me.

Anyway, I've been putting together a little ruleset of tweaked Necromunda rules, and I was just hoping to get some feedback for some Servitor rules I've just drafted:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Servitors

Troop Type -Servitor- M4 WS3 BS4 S3 T4 W1 I4 A1 Ld7

Cost to recruit: 80 credits.

Equipment: Servitors come equipped with a Bio-Booster and Respirator. They can be armed with Heavy Weapons or Close Combat Weapons and can be given any additional equipment except grenades.

Servitor models often come with Bionic replacements (Eye, Leg, Arm). A model with these must have them purchased even though it has not yet been injured.

Immune to Psychology. Servitors are immune to all psychology, and do not have to take Leadership tests.

Mindlock. All Servitors operate under close supervision of their master (usually a TechPriest.) If their master goes Out of Action they will only be able to function normally on the D6 roll of a 4, 5 or a 6 made at the beginning of each turn. On the roll of a 1, 2 or a 3 they suffer Mindlock and are unable to do anything during that turn except fight back in close combat if they are already engaged.

Mechanised Body. Servitors have a mechanised body that confers a 5+ save.

Slow but Steady. Servitors cannot Run, Hide, Jump or Charge. However they are immune to pinning, even when they suffer a Flesh Wound they are not pinned. (Although still suffer –1 WS/BS). They are affected by Down and Out of Action in the same way as ordinary party members.

Mindless. Servitors never gain experience and cannot gain new skills or characteristic increase. However they all have the Weapon smith and Bulging Biceps skills.

Regenerate. Once a week, roll for any serious injuries the Servitor has and on the roll of a 6 the Servitor manages to repair the damage, removing the injury and all its effects.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Can you guys tell me what you think? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Here's the few things I am questioning the most:

Do the rules capture the overall feel of a Servitor?
I am questioning the stat line a little, but I ripped it straight from Codex Imperialis (along with some of the special rules). However the I4 seems to make them expert sentries, is this good? The current SM codex gives them the stat line of a guardsmen with +1 Ld. I'm not sure which I prefer.

Is there too many special rules?
This is the most special rule heavy character archetype I have made yet. Would I just be better giving a ganger a certain equipment combination?

What do you think of the Slow and Steady special rule? It's all homebrew, but in my head that's how a servitor should function.

And lastly, is 80 credits a well costed amount? This is perhaps the most important because I'll want all the parties to have similar size gang ratings to help balance scenarios!

---

Thanks for any help. I look forward to coming part of the DakkaDakka =I=munda community. And all of your threads in the modeling section have kept me drooling for months now!

I would probably cost him higher... Something like 100Pts I think.

The fact that he can´t get experience is a downside, and a huge one. But he gets so many plusses, including built in mesh armor, and five upgrades, ones that are perfect for his task if he becomes your gang´s heavy.

In addition, the fact that he´s immune to leadership tests, and can regenerate from injuries, very fluffy, but veeery powerful.

Excellent Servitor rules, but as mentioned, I´d probably go with 100 points.

Hope that helps you

Edit: Welcome to Dakka

Righto, bit of an update on the sharing of PDF´s. I called GW england this morning, spoke with a guy called Paul, who´s in their specialist games department, and he confirmed that they don´t have a problem with us sharing the rules.

To quote him, "It´s a community thing, the more people have these rules, the more people will play the games, so this shouldn´t be a problem at all".

He did say, that if people start making a business out of them, GW has a tendency to "break [their] proverbial legs".

So it seems that we´re all good!

That's great news Xanthos. I think I took all the PDFs from the site before it closed, so if anyone is missing anything I am happy to share :]

I took all your servitor rules suggestions on too (and looked at the separate thread here!) at first I was simply going to port as much from 2nd edition 40K as I could, but now it really seems that only Xenos (if anything) should be getting the 2nd edition treatment. It really hit home as I was looking through the original Sisters of Battle codex for more =I=munda class archetypes, a preacher has WS 4/ BS 4! When in my eyes he warrants a Juve's stats with boosted Ld and no more!

As a result I think I'll be dropping some of the servitor's stats- (Also I have noticed I made close combat servitors useless, so I'll change the no charging rule to state that he can charge his normal movement rate (4" usually) and does not receive the +1 A and WS.)

I can't wait to get my 40K army built (Tyranids) so I can start putting these ideas into practice! :]

Sounds like some good calls there, and sit sounds like you´re starting to get into the spirit

I´m looking forward to seeing what you make of this, so hurry with the ´nids.

Thanks :] yeah I am totally getting into the spirit, and it's distracting me from my nids now >_>.
I'm picking up a box of Crypt Ghouls, green stuff and some tools today, so stay tuned ha!

For everyone putting together rules, I want to ask how you have dealt with leaders. Do you just use the Gang leader stats? Do you beef him up a little bit? Or do you give the Player options to say 4 advancements/skills of their choice. And how do you go about costing these so that the gang rating remains accurate?
Let's pool some ideas! :D

In my group, we´ve gone with 5 upgrades for the gang, 3 of these can go on the leader. This is in addition to making the leader a 2W character.

Since all groups get this option, we haven´t worried about balance and costing issues. We have however ruled, that XP has to go up to match the upgrades given.

Meaning that a ganger who starts with one skill or stat upgrade has +10 XP, and for a leader or heavy +20XP, just like gaining upgrades through the campaign.

Also, we went with five special gear choices, stuff like armour and scopes, medikits and such. And no duplicates. So you can have whatever combo, but not more than one carapace armour for example.

Unless there are modeling/fluff reasons for it. We´re going easy on this rule, since the players are all geared towards the story aspect of the campaign. Therefore we´re not too worried about min-maxers.

I've been doing a little bit of pondering about some sort of "Apocalypse scale" version of =I=munda. Now I'm not talking about gigantic armies, Titans and orbital bombardments. I'm talking about really big and destructive battles between small groups or even individuals.

The idea kind of came from the Wars of Vindication. These wars were basically a conflict between two factions within the Officio Assessinorum: those loyal to Vandire and those loyal to the real Grand Master. Apparently all sorts of ancient and forbidden weapons were used and whole parts of the Imperial Palace were blown up.

Now imagine battles between just two Assassins who possess all those strange and powerful weapons, the game would be detailed and story driven like =I=munda, Dark Heresy and so on. But it would be wacky, fast paced and destructive like GorkaMorka, Space Hulk and so on but then to a more extreme level.

Small units of Space Marines, hordes of many being blown up as cannon fodder and so on.

Space Hulk/Warhammer Quest had some terrain generation rules if Im not mistaken. This could be combined. Imagine a squad of Chaos Space Marines and Loyalists battling it out in some hive city. Players would be able to blow up entire sections of the city and be forced to move to other (randomly generated) parts.

Battles in space ships could be played like that as well, but would include additional rules covering the risks of blowing up the ship and what not.

For those Wars of Vindication, you need to have stands of innocent bystanders (ecclessiarchy, adeptus adminstratum clerks etc.)!
And a chance of attracting the Arbites ofcourse. Well, in the early stages at least. After it really escalates, you'll be playing cat and mouse in abandoned buildings, á la Enemy at the Gates (but with Eversors...)

The terrain generation rules from Space Hulk consisted of so-called "geo-tiles": cards with small-scale pre-generated map sections on them, that you could arrange in various ways. Nice, but somewhat limited. You did manage to "pre-generate" fairly large maps, but it had no more flexibility than a set of modular trench boards.
WHQ had a deck of cards, with one card for each board sections. Exploration basically meant: walk to the edge of the known map, stare into the darkness. Pick a card and Poof! New corridor appears (along with some monsters). Great for an exploration game, but less so, if the battleground is meant to represent familiar ground.
Maybe you could hybridise the two?

Blowing up the ship isn't a risk, it's an objective....

For those Wars of Vindication, you need to have stands of innocent bystanders (ecclessiarchy, adeptus adminstratum clerks etc.)!
And a chance of attracting the Arbites ofcourse. Well, in the early stages at least. After it really escalates, you'll be playing cat and mouse in abandoned buildings, á la Enemy at the Gates (but with Eversors...)

The more I'm thinking about it, the more I think this would work great as a scenario rather than an entire variant of the game. It could sort of be this climax game/final battle kind of thing in a campaign.

So the scenario would be divided into three phases:
-Introduction: civilians might still be around, the two parties start attacking each other. (one or two turns)
-NPC neutralisation: These guys (or girls) would be NPC's, they don't belong to either player. However, there is a possibility that they side with one of the players. This is determined by the narrative, but could also be decided by some sort of roll-test if wanted to. Another possibility (most common I guess) is that these NPC's would start attacking both sides. (one or two turns)
-Cat and mouse: With nobody left to stand in each others' way both parties move in for the kill. (two turns)

Note that from turn one terrain can be destroyed. Perhaps it's this destruction of terrain that forces the NPC's to step in. In theory everything can be destroyed, fast terrain generation (done either by GM or random d6) represent the fact that the players run to another part of the city/ship/etc to continue fighting.
This is the climactic and destructive battle, the objectives aren't to secure places but simply to destroy your enemy. The game is over until the enemies are all destroyed.

Blowing up the ship isn't a risk, it's an objective....

Might be a cool variant on the scenario. One player has to destroy the ship while the other has to prevent that. Charges could be set (or self destruct button pushed) and then the attacker would need to escape or something along those lines.
It would be a scenario kind of in the phases of:
-Entering the ship (Introduction)
-Getting to the reactor to set the charges (NPC neutralisation...well variant of it)
-Escape the ship before it blows (Cat and mouse): this part would be great. the attacker needs to get to the escape pods or whatever while the defender will prevent that from happening. While this is happening stuff gets blown up (GM or random roll) forcing the players to use another route than first.

The terrain generation rules from Space Hulk consisted of so-called "geo-tiles": cards with small-scale pre-generated map sections on them, that you could arrange in various ways. Nice, but somewhat limited. You did manage to "pre-generate" fairly large maps, but it had no more flexibility than a set of modular trench boards.
WHQ had a deck of cards, with one card for each board sections. Exploration basically meant: walk to the edge of the known map, stare into the darkness. Pick a card and Poof! New corridor appears (along with some monsters). Great for an exploration game, but less so, if the battleground is meant to represent familiar ground.
Maybe you could hybridise the two?

Maybe, I'll have to get my hands on Warhammer Quest for more on that. I like the idea of a GM (Game Master) being involved in the game, maybe the GM would thus generate the terrain and destruction while also controlling the NPC's.

Double post...

Small groups of OTT powered individuals demolishing terrain as they fight each other.... sounds like =I=Ball Z, to me 0:

Maybe so, but I assume a lot of battles in the 40k universe, especially when powerful psykers, daemons, assassins, marines are taking part would end up like that.

Most likely, just look at current day warfare/combat and multiply the damage tenfold.
Destroyable terrain would take an awful lot of work though, depending on the level of detail you want:
You could just have "whole" and "destroyed" versions of each terrain piece at minimal, or you could go crazy with multiple damage categories: "whole", "damaged", "compromised", "destroyed" and "annihilated" for example.*
On the other hand, such terrain could pull double duty for apocalypse battles...



*: crafting entire buildings uit of magnetised chunks of rubble would be insane. Very cool, but insane...

I must say, I have been following this blog and several others for quite a while now and I am very Impressed.

If I wasnt in the middle of ATZ I would really love to introduce this to my FLGS. (Since we have a very large "Skirm" style gameplay following)

Also have you all considered starting a =][=munda for dummies/starters thread? Or even getting a "official" website going for it? Heck what is it..........Blogspot?..........Would be perfect for this!

@Modhail: you make a good point. However, you don't have several models of the same figure to show how wounded he is. In other words, you would simply have various pieces of terrain which can be interconnected (similar to your tunnels and such) or may not even be like that (just say they climbed on another level or broke through a wall etc) and change them when they get destroyed.

It doesn't even have to mean that the terrain got totally destroyed, could also be that players simply move to another part of the area. But the idea of destroying it is just too cool!

Destroying things is just too much fun, isn't it?

You did give me an idea though:
If you use a system of interconnected rooms and corridors, or something similar, consisting of interior spaces, all you really need is to mark where the buildings have been damaged to the point of collapse.
You can do that by simply leaving the terrain intact and creating (3D) "collapse" markers, that you place and/or slide forward inside the rooms. That way you can really give players a sense of getting closed in, and force them to shift to another location: A collapse marker touches you? You're now buried in rubble, time to die. (Maybe give terminators or other similarly tough brutes a one time chance to wrestle themselvers free.)
Since most of Holy Terra is roofed over anyway, this would suit the Wars of Vindication just fine...

Hmm, maybe some separate rules on breaking free. Strength will determine if the player breaks free (strong enough to break through) however, characters such as psykers tend to have lower strength but are capable to wrestle themselves free with their powers perhaps (separate rule for them).

Some of you (Dark Eldar fans) might be interested in this. I posted a "broken" version of it which appeared on Warseer, but this includes a little bit more. A real shame that it never got finished! :(

Hi all I'm looking to start a an =I=munda campaign shortly (provided I can find some peeps hence the sig!) and have a pretty good idea what I'm going to run with Ruleswise. Was reading earlier on in the thread that some of you have the Necromunda PDF's from the old Specialist games webite would be grateful if I could get some of those off someone Am also looking to get hold of the revised version (2) of the skills for Necromunda. I'm not sure if that was on the specialist games site or not but I remeber having the PDF again would be MOST grateful if someone could share that with me too

@Malika and Modz, both your ideas sound really interesting. Where is the information on the vindication wars found? I haven't heard of it before (or can't remember it!).

@jp400, I think the start of this thread covers the basics really well! I would love for us to have our own site, but at the same time I wouldn't want it to be shied away, so I think it's good having it here on Dakka! :]

@Stoneblood, I think I have them all, how would be the best way to get them to you? I can't remember the Skill Table revision however, so I might not have that one. I still think you should just role with the original rules (or the ORB if you don't want the original rules) and just House rule the rest to suit you and your gamers' tastes :]