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.

EDIT:



Kill Team is a fan-made unofficial expansion to Warhammer 40,000 that allows you to fight more intimate, more narrative driven games of Warhammer 40,000. Instead of fighting across vast battlefields controlling armies of hundreds of troops, you take control of a small task force with a handful of men.

You can find the Kill Team core rules, campaign rules, kill team lists, and other materials at:
http://heralds-of-ruin.blogspot.co.uk/p/kill-team-rules.html

If you have any question or feedback, please leave them below!

We now have a Facebook group! You can join it, and join in the discussion, here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/481345801919687/

- Darth Meer

My buddy and I are getting ready to try out your rule set this weekend and we're pretty pumped about it.

I'll try to post some pics/battle report stuff.

It's going to be Crons v DE

My outcast kill team

Pariah lord with mind shackles (very much looking forward to that combo) and gauntlet of fire so I can try out the flaming rules
8 warriors
4 immortals
(247 pts)

I converted up a pariah for my lord. The warrior and immortal models are all the old 2nd ed metal models and some space crusade chaos androids.

As for comments, the new jump/climb rule is particularly punishing to crons since passing an initiative test requires a 1 or 2. I expect the DE will be flipping over walls and jumping onto platforms without any regard to ladders or stairs. Which in honestly should be very fluffy.

Also modifying the run rule as equal to max roll all the time partially limits the DE's fleet. We're going to house rule it as +D3 for fleet effects

We're going to play on a Sewers of Malifaux table and were house ruling open sewers/difficult terrain as slowing movement by D3. We want to keep everybody moving.

Thanks for your comment Kemen'tep, I'm happy you revived this thread!

I'm glad you're going to be playing some Kill Team soon, I've been playing it regularly with my group but only a few others seem to be picking it up.

Any feedback would be amazing. Especially on how the Necron team list works. We've played a few games with Necrons before, but any ideas/criticisms you have would be greatly appreciated. The Pariah + Mind Shackle combo is awesome but expensive, so hopefully won't be too broken...

Once you play, would your Dark Eldar friend be able to provide some feedback too? DE will be the next team list we write, so any ideas or tweaks would be good. Especially regarding Pain Tokens and how they can be converted over to KT better.

If you take some photos I'll add them to the Kill Team section on my blog. I've been meaning to do it for a while but keep forgetting my camera...

As for comments, the new jump/climb rule is particularly punishing to crons since passing an initiative test requires a 1 or 2. I expect the DE will be flipping over walls and jumping onto platforms without any regard to ladders or stairs. Which in honestly should be very fluffy.

Well I can't imagine Necrons would be very good at jumping! Metal bodies tend to be ungainly :-P. The mechanic has been working very well so far, and allows for '3d' gameplay much easier.

Also modifying the run rule as equal to max roll all the time partially limits the DE's fleet. We're going to house rule it as +D3 for fleet effects

Good idea! Im compiling a list of additions for v1.2, i think this will be in it. Any other ideas you come up with during game would be great. I was also thinking of reducing running to 4 inches flat, but needs more testing (could change Fleet to simply Run 6" then). The reason I changed the run rule originally is to keep movement flowing, as there are no transports or deep strike. Maximum run allows models to actually get into tactical positions.

We're going to play on a Sewers of Malifaux table and were house ruling open sewers/difficult terrain as slowing movement by D3. We want to keep everybody moving.

Another good idea. Although I was actually thinking changing the difficult terrain rules to something like this (we've played it once and worked well):

"If a model wants to move into, out of, or through Difficult Terrain he moves at his normal rate, but may not Run this turn. A model that charges into Difficult Terrain is affected normally using the regular rules."

Im not sure we'll be going with this wording exactly, but we wanted to allow a better freedom of movement as KT games are usually played on terrain heavy boards. The lack of being able to run represents the inability to move fast through the terrain. If you have a better idea when playtesting feel free to try it and report back!

Good stuff.


Minor gripe: As an ork player I think that certain iconic orky items and terminology should have been adopted. No" iron gob"? no squigs of any kind? how about " more dakka", etc.

I would try to stick to the established flavor and lore whensever possible. My orks don't wear "spikey bitz" that is for chaos, etc....

Hi CT GAMER, if you want to write up some Ork bitz for their armoury i'd be more than willing to take a look and add them to the list! Be good to get some more options in there. Also, as an Ork player if you have any issues with the list let me know and I'll fix them.

BTW, just in case thjs wasn't obvious.
I really like your rule set. It's simple and yet maintains some of that great skirmish game Necromunda-style crunch.
My friend and I looked at several sets of kill team rules and yours were by far our favorite.

So we've played our first two games, loads of fun. We took notes and pictures so hopefully we'll get a battle report put together.

The only big change we made was making running away worth 1 VP to your opponent.

I was wondering if I could get some rules clarifications?

We both rolled "burn it down" in our second game, I destroyed one objective and he destroyed one objective. We decided that this meant neither of us accomplished the mission.
Likewise I destroyed the objective in my deployment zone just in case he rolled "assault" so that I could deny his ability to complete his mission.
Is this how you've interpreted things? it seems to be consistent with the phrasing.

Also, if I have a model in base contact with an objective but am also locked in assault can I continue directing my attacks against the objective?

The Sewers of Malifaux board made for a great game and since the tiles are already blocked out in 1" squares it made moving very simple even with the extremely dense terrain.
The climbing rule was great for the DE and worked just the way you'd think. They were all over the board, leaping gaps, jumping up onto platforms and down from gantries while the necrons were limited to using stairs and ladders. The +D3 fleet made them super fast and very capable of moving into cover.

For pain tokens we just gave them to each individual who made a kill using the "Team of Heroes" rule. In the case of a sweeping advance it was randomly allocated among those who participated.
The wyches did roll their combat drugs as a single roll, in retrospect we could have had them each roll independently.

It's great that you had a good game, looking forward to your battle report! I'll post it on my blog when its done.

The only big change we made was making running away worth 1 VP to your opponent.

Thats really weird, because we sat down last night in Bugmans and overhauled the Kill Team Mission rules, making Run Away! and Wipe Out secondary objectives that are worth 2 VP. After all, the mission is more important than survival for some Kill Teams! Obviously was channeling your idea :-D

We both rolled "burn it down" in our second game, I destroyed one objective and he destroyed one objective. We decided that this meant neither of us accomplished the mission. Likewise I destroyed the objective in my deployment zone just in case he rolled "assault" so that I could deny his ability to complete his mission.

As I said before, the Kill Team Mission rules have changed quite a bit so give them another read. I have actually took your experience and amended the rules a bit stating you cannot destroy your own Marker (very clever for thinking of it though!).

Also, if I have a model in base contact with an objective but am also locked in assault can I continue directing my attacks against the objective?

I've changed the ruling for Markers now, I hope this makes more sense:

"To destroy a Marker you must move into base contact with it during the Movement phase. Once a model is in base contact it may attack it in its own Assault phase. To attack a Marker, a model in base contact with it rolls a number of dice equal to their base Attacks. Any results of a 6 will automatically destroy the Marker. While in base contact with a Marker a model does not count as being engaged, and if engaged by an enemy may not make attacks against the Marker.*"

*Added the last bit thanks to your question.

Thanks again for your comments! Give the new rules a read through and let me know what you think, I've taken a few ideas you've had too. Most of the new rules are to do with the Mission, as we wanted the basic rules to be fairly simple.

New version of the rules now here: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzbfV0v166neazJoX0Q4RW5WQm8

I have a suggestion for the campaign section. I think that the individual's experience points should be added into their cost for determining the model's and team's points value. A tooled up leader with 6 wins and extra abilities should be worth more than one who's just getting started and it would allow more opportunity for underdog bonuses for new teams.

We also gave "hammer of wrath" to any model declaring a charge against an opponent on a lower level (which required a successful initiative test), likewise charging up onto a higher level counted as charging through difficult terrain and resulted in attacking at Int 1.

Yup, definitely need to do an update for the Campaign rules soon. There are a few holes in there I need to fill. The EXP added to points makes sense, so I'll make a note to add that :-D. I'm also thinking of rewording a load of the rules. Such as Points Total / Points Store, as it may be a bit too similar. I was thinking Team Points and Requisition Points? Maybe give a little description of each at the beginning to clarify as they are quite important.

You're referring to rules for diving and climbing charges? :-D. I actually planned to include rules for that originally, but though it would be too complicated. If you think it has a place i might reconsider adding it. Originally, a Diving Charge gave the charger +1S. There was no penalty for a Climbing Charge, other than clarifying rules for climbing while charging (i.e. taking an I test mid way through the charge).

At a glance it looks pretty cool; I'm going to have to try these out when I get a chance.

@Kemen'tep would you able to let your friend know that I've drafted up a Dark Eldar list now? Could he take a quick look at it and check for any errors? Thanks!

List can be found here:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzbfV0v166neNkdYeXcxSDJnWGc

We've got 4 guys from work who have been going over the rules for Kill Team and had a chance to get together and play on Monday. I've had a lot of fun reading and prepping for the game, it's definitely scratching the itch I've had to pick up Necromunda.

I've got a Blood Angel army built from the Army List, I had some ideas and comments for that but I'll save that for another post. Here were some things we came across while playing.

Post Battle Sequence
I won both games I played, but felt disappointed with the end results of both experience and requisition. I had a couple of thoughts to address this.
Experience

In the second match my 9 Blood Angels faced 25 Dark Eldar. Everyone on my team earned 1 EXP for surviving (9 EXP), my team won earning the Team Leader 1 EXP, my Team Leader killed the opponents Team Leader (1 EXP). So, my team earned 11 EXP from the skirmish. My opponent only had 2 models die and no additional achievements, his team walked away with 23 EXP. Even though I bested more than half of his force I ended up with less than half of the EXP he gained.

Perhaps it would make sense if the entire team, not just the Team Leader gained 1 EXP for winning. Granted, that would mean if my opponent won they’d have earned at least 46 EXP in this battle, but it seems like victory should favor the winner.

As I watched my opponent level up 23 characters I realized his force just became significantly more powerful, but there was no change in the point value of the army. He could potentially have one of his basic 9 pt models at level 20 and that wouldn’t be reflected in its point value.

Perhaps levels should come with a point value. I was thinking 2pts per level, so as per above example, a model that had a base cost of 9pts would become 11pts at level 2, and 29pts at level 20. I haven’t tested what a level 20’s stat line and skills would be, but it seems like 49pts would be a fair price to represent that model. This would also help less experienced teams ramp up their army given the underdog mechanic.

Requisition

In both of the games I won, I rolled 1’s on the requisition table (total score of 2 on the chart) earning 15 points per battle. My first opponent walked away with 50pts, the second with 30pts. Fluff wise, maybe my army was too focused on killing the opponent, while they were too focused on looting. Regardless, it didn’t feel like a victory.

Perhaps the requisition table for the victor could be played like moving through difficult terrain, roll 2D6 and pick the best. You’d still only have a 1 in 6 chance of rolling at least one 6, but a 1 in 36 chance of rolling snake eyes. I like the idea of having options, there’d be a 1 in 18 change of rolling a 5 & 6, but I like the option of choosing between 50pts for my store, or 30pts and a unique weapon.

Assault
Even though they’re a Teams of Heros, models may still want to operate in a fashion similar to a unit. I noticed combat with a group of models becomes complicated and limited as currently suggested, here are a few thoughts.

“We Fight as a Team” – a special rule where a model can engage in a combat if they are in base contact with an enemy model, or within 2” of a model from a friendly unit that is in base contact with an enemy. This allows groups to work similarly to traditional combat. It also helps uncomplicated groups of models charging into combat.

Overwatch took a big hit in our games, by charging a single model into another single model (surrounded by teammates eligible for Counter-Charge) we were able to reduce the effect of Overwatch by a factor of the number of Counter-Charging models. Getting a snap shot is low odds, but it might be the gamble that saves the team. Narrative wise I had a hard time accepting a Killa Kan charging my Team Leader while 5 Tactical Marines stood within 3 inches of him and didn’t raise their weapons to defend their leader until they could Counter-Charge.

Perhaps we could revise the Assault Phase’s Charge Sub-phase:
1. Declare Chargers into a Combat.
2. Declare Counter-Chargers into a Combat.
3. Counter-Chargers are able to fire Overwatch.
4. Resolve Charges.
5. Resolve Counter-Charges.

Is attacking an objective an attack or a special action? By moving into base contact with an objective during the movement phase you don't get an extra charge attack or Hammer of Wrath. Also, if it's a combat attack, some models won't be able to interact with the objective the turn they get into base contact with it because they've fired a weapon that prohibits charging in the Shooting phase (Rapid Fire, Heavy)

Our group decided interacting with the objective was a special action that is based off a models attack characteristic, but not an attack. Model's didn't get charge bonuses, but was allowed to participate in the shooting phase without penalty

Building a team from Codex vs Army List

Codex characters don’t have item count restrictions (eg. for ever X models you can purchase 1 of the following), yet they are present in the Army Lists. That looked like it'd cause imbalance in the game, an SM Army List could only field Tactical Marines, while a SM codex list could basically field a Devastator Squad.

It would be nice if the ruling was consistent between formats.

All said, I think we had a good time and are looking forward to playing more. I'm excited to see the work you've been doing and your openness to comment, please let me know if there's anything I can do to help.

First I'd just like to day thank you Redlamp for a well written and lengthy piece of feedback! Second, the Campaign rules are very rough and in dire need of an update, so all your feedback will go along way to improving them. Now I'll try and dive in and answer questions, comment on ideas:

Post Battle Sequence
The next version of the campaign rules we're going to be adding EXP to the total points value of a model (at 1EXP = +1 pnt). This will do 2 things, firstly it will make the gap between 'winning' and 'losing' players higher, allowing lower point costed teams to use the underdog bonus more to catch up. Secondly, this will penalise player's somewhat for taking 'horde armies' as most player's will get some sort of underdog bonus (esp if, say, a 5 man terminator kill team plays a 25 man nid team).

Your second point to do with the different EXP rewards is valid, but im not sure how we would fix it fairly. The way Mordheim worked, was to group the 'henchmen' into groups. The henchmen groups then gained EXP together and rolled on a less powerful skill chart. Maybe something like that? Perhaps we could create a rule where all Core models from the same entry would become a single group for EXP? E.g. you would write on your roster Tactical Marine x5, and all 5 models would gain EXP and roll for skills (on a lesser chart, with no ability to gain skills) together. Or at least in groups of five. Obviously this would only work with teams from the Kill Team Lists not Codexes though...

I think we should keep +1EXP for winning limited to just the leader though, teams would get too powerful if they have a winning streak they could become nigh on unbeatable. Your idea about the 2d6 winner roll on the requisition table is a good idea that we should add, so I think that would give enough reward to the winner.

Assault
Hmm i haven't experienced the complication you and your friends experienced, but then our individual combat aren't usually that big. We usually automatically just roll all similar attacks together, regardless if they're from different units (which i suppose isnt exactly RAW).

Maybe a note on quick-rolling? Something like: "For the sake of speed, if models are all equipped with the same weapons you may wish to roll all attacks at the same time, using the majority Toughness of those in base contact with these models. If you do this, your opponent may then choose which of the models in base contact with those that rolled together are wounded."

Remember, as all models are treated as separate units they need to be in base contact to hit anything, not within 2" (unless they are a Squad). Maybe I should add that to the rules as well so people remember?

Overwatch/Charge sub-phase
Hmm good idea and looks very cool. How about: "As soon as a model is able to fire Overwatch, any model within 3" of it may immediately choose to also fire Overwatch at any model charging the original Overwatching model. A model may only fire Overwatch once per phase, regardless if it is charged itself."

Of course then we could re-arrange the Charge-sub phase to be more tactical! Something like this:

1. Declare ALL charges against against a unit.
2. Resolve Overwatch fire (using the rules above).
3. Roll charge range for all chargers and move models.
4. Move any counter-chargers.

This would mean the charger has to declare all models charging into a single model before overwatch, allowing overwatchers to choose their targets. It would also allow more counter-charging, and then counter-counter-charging... What do you think? Too complicated or ok?

How about simplifying it and say all chargers against a single unit need to roll together to see how far they charge?

Destructible Objectives
To quote the rules "To destroy a Marker you must move into base contact with it during the Movement phase. Once a model is in base contact it may attack it in its own Assault phase. To attack a Marker, a model in base contact with it rolls a number of dice equal to their base Attacks. Any results of a 6 will automatically destroy the Marker."

I may replace 'attack' with 'attempt to destroy' to clarify, as it seems to be getting confused. It is not a normal 'attack', and you do not charge an objective. You simply attempt to destroy it using your Attacks value without any extra special rules. In fact I may rewrite the rules to make it more clear and move it from the Assault phase altogether. Something like:

"You may only destroy a Marker in your own Movement phase. To destroy a Marker you must move into base contact with it during the Movement phase, and any model in base contact with it rolls a number of dice equal to their base Attacks. Any results of a 6 will automatically destroy the Marker. While in base contact with a Marker a model does not count as being engaged, and may act normally in all respects. If a model is in base contact with an enemy as well a Marker in its Movement phase, it may not attempt to destroy the Marker."

Hows that?

Building a team from Codex vs Army List
Codex models do have restrictions: You are only allowed 5 special weapons and only 2 can be Heavy. This roughly equates to what you can take in a Kill Team list: Usually 2/3 from Core and 2/3 from Rare. In fact you can probably get more special weapons in a Kill Team list! Team Leaders can both take as many special weapons as they can carry :-P

End
Thanks again for your comments, they have been extremely helpful! I'll try and sort the campaign rules out soon. Let me know what you think of the changes to the main rules and I'll see about updating them ASAP. If you have any more feedback from future games please don't hesitate to comment!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I've updated the Blood Angels list, hope it fixes a few things you had problems with:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzbfV0v166necENxNEFaS3YwSUU

Ive added DC to core, but added a the 'Unquenchable Thirst' rule as i felt the penalty of 'no scoring' doesnt really apply to KT games.

I am going to try and get some people at my LGC to play this with me-it looks epic!!!

Post Battle Sequence

The next version of the campaign rules we're going to be adding EXP to the total points value of a model (at 1EXP = +1 pnt). This will do 2 things, firstly it will make the gap between 'winning' and 'losing' players higher, allowing lower point costed teams to use the underdog bonus more to catch up. Secondly, this will penalise player's somewhat for taking 'horde armies' as most player's will get some sort of underdog bonus (esp if, say, a 5 man terminator kill team plays a 25 man nid team).

One thing to consider is that the owner is being charged for something they haven't seen the reward from yet, models don't become more threatening until they roll on the advancement chart. Also, from a point accounting side it might be easier to only count levels instead of tallying EXP.

Your second point to do with the different EXP rewards is valid, but im not sure how we would fix it fairly. The way Mordheim worked, was to group the 'henchmen' into groups. The henchmen groups then gained EXP together and rolled on a less powerful skill chart. Maybe something like that? Perhaps we could create a rule where all Core models from the same entry would become a single group for EXP? E.g. you would write on your roster Tactical Marine x5, and all 5 models would gain EXP and roll for skills (on a lesser chart, with no ability to gain skills) together. Or at least in groups of five. Obviously this would only work with teams from the Kill Team Lists not Codexes though...

The more I think about it, the trickier it seems to balance this. Currently one of the problems we run into is team size disparity; what your suggesting could work, but then how do you strike a balance between Army Lists and Codex. This is a good sticky point, lets come back to it.

Assault

Hmm i haven't experienced the complication you and your friends experienced, but then our individual combat aren't usually that big. We usually automatically just roll all similar attacks together, regardless if they're from different units (which i suppose isnt exactly RAW).

Maybe a note on quick-rolling? Something like: "For the sake of speed, if models are all equipped with the same weapons you may wish to roll all attacks at the same time, using the majority Toughness of those in base contact with these models. If you do this, your opponent may then choose which of the models in base contact with those that rolled together are wounded."

Remember, as all models are treated as separate units they need to be in base contact to hit anything, not within 2" (unless they are a Squad). Maybe I should add that to the rules as well so people remember?

I'm keen on ways to speed things up so quick-roll rules would be helpful. I love the idea of having a Team of Heros, but want to plow through combat similarly to straight 40k. On that note, you can only place so many models around a single base and if you can't follow a direct line into base contact from a charge then you're out of luck for joining an assault. That's part of why I suggested the "We Fight as a Team" special rule. it came up in one of the games I played, which is why I mentioned it.

Overwatch/Charge sub-phase

Hmm good idea and looks very cool. How about: "As soon as a model is able to fire Overwatch, any model within 3" of it may immediately choose to also fire Overwatch at any model charging the original Overwatching model. A model may only fire Overwatch once per phase, regardless if it is charged itself."

Of course then we could re-arrange the Charge-sub phase to be more tactical! Something like this:

1. Declare ALL charges against against a unit.
2. Resolve Overwatch fire (using the rules above).
3. Roll charge range for all chargers and move models.
4. Move any counter-chargers.

This would mean the charger has to declare all models charging into a single model before overwatch, allowing overwatchers to choose their targets. It would also allow more counter-charging, and then counter-counter-charging... What do you think? Too complicated or ok?

How about simplifying it and say all chargers against a single unit need to roll together to see how far they charge?

This sounds great. I'm a little unclear about the counter-counter-charge, I had looked at Counter-Charge like a pre-combat Pile-In. One of my concerns is still about getting into base to base contact, but my Assault notes cover that.

Destructible Objectives

To quote the rules "To destroy a Marker you must move into base contact with it during the Movement phase. Once a model is in base contact it may attack it in its own Assault phase. To attack a Marker, a model in base contact with it rolls a number of dice equal to their base Attacks. Any results of a 6 will automatically destroy the Marker."

I may replace 'attack' with 'attempt to destroy' to clarify, as it seems to be getting confused. It is not a normal 'attack', and you do not charge an objective. You simply attempt to destroy it using your Attacks value without any extra special rules. In fact I may rewrite the rules to make it more clear and move it from the Assault phase altogether. Something like:

"You may only destroy a Marker in your own Movement phase. To destroy a Marker you must move into base contact with it during the Movement phase, and any model in base contact with it rolls a number of dice equal to their base Attacks. Any results of a 6 will automatically destroy the Marker. While in base contact with a Marker a model does not count as being engaged, and may act normally in all respects. If a model is in base contact with an enemy as well a Marker in its Movement phase, it may not attempt to destroy the Marker."

Having the "attempt to destroy" on the Movement Phase clears things up very nicely, it also allows units to defend themselves. Does the unit need to be in base contact at the start of the Movement Phase to make the attempt, or can do they do it on the same turn they get into contact with the objective?

Building a team from Codex vs Army List

Codex models do have restrictions: You are only allowed 5 special weapons and only 2 can be Heavy. This roughly equates to what you can take in a Kill Team list: Usually 2/3 from Core and 2/3 from Rare. In fact you can probably get more special weapons in a Kill Team list! Team Leaders can both take as many special weapons as they can carry :-P

Good reminder about the special weapons limit. That made me think, do Unique Weapons count against these limits? I'm hoping it was just for starting armies, If not that may make for a difficult balancing act later into a campaign.

End
Thanks again for your comments, they have been extremely helpful! I'll try and sort the campaign rules out soon. Let me know what you think of the changes to the main rules and I'll see about updating them ASAP. If you have any more feedback from future games please don't hesitate to comment!
Thank you for taking the time to read my comments, your openness and consideration are appreciated and make Kill Team more appealing to me as a player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Darth Meer wrote:
Also, I've updated the Blood Angels list, hope it fixes a few things you had problems with:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzbfV0v166necENxNEFaS3YwSUU

Ive added DC to core, but added a the 'Unquenchable Thirst' rule as i felt the penalty of 'no scoring' doesnt really apply to KT games.

I love my Death Company, but I've been trying to figure out how to balance their power and fluff with the Kill Team rules. While I like the idea of Unquenchable Thirst it seems like it'd be a consequence of Red Thirst and not Black Rage. When a Blood Angel has succumbed to Black Rage they hallucinate that they're reliving Sanguinius' final moments in his fight against Horus and chaos to save the Emperor. If a member of the DC doesn't die in battle they're struck down by a Chaplain to end their suffering; Lemartes (a DC character) is an exception, after each battle he's placed in stasis until they need him again. I was thinking we could make a Special Rule that plays on the Blood Angel's narrative and your Legendary Heros rule of requiring upkeep between battles. Here's my suggestion:

Lemartes Legacy
Inspired by Lemartes continued service in battle, the Blood Angels have developed stasis units to keep their Death Company preserved from the grip of the Black Rage between battles, until they're needed to fight again.
At the end of every battle any Death Company that was not injured during battle counts as injured as a consequence of the Black Rage devouring their sanity. You can ignore this rule by paying 5 points from your Points Store during the Post Battle Sequence to put the model in stasis.

Also, from a point accounting side it might be easier to only count levels instead of tallying EXP.

Yeh you may be right, level it is.

On that note, you can only place so many models around a single base and if you can't follow a direct line into base contact from a charge then you're out of luck for joining an assault.

Hmm i'll have to playtest this, im having a game on Wednesday so will try stuff out then and get back to you. It does seem silly that models who cant fit cant strike. Maybe allowing models in base contact with enemy models to hit as well? Its just as a skirmish game i think the 2" rule will get confusing as individual models nearby might not be engaged.

I'm a little unclear about the counter-counter-charge, I had looked at Counter-Charge like a pre-combat Pile-In.

Sorry bad terminology, I was just referring to models charging counter-charging models. A revised charge sub-phase would look like:

1. Choose an enemy unit, declare ALL charges against against that unit.
2. Resolve Overwatch fire.
3. Roll charge range for all chargers and move models.
4. Move any counter-chargers.
5. Choose another enemy unit and go back to Step 1 until finished.

Does the unit need to be in base contact at the start of the Movement Phase to make the attempt, or can do they do it on the same turn they get into contact with the objective?

I think you should be able to move AND try and destroy an objective in the same phase, as it will keep the game flowing better.

That made me think, do Unique Weapons count against these limits? I'm hoping it was just for starting armies, If not that may make for a difficult balancing act later into a campaign.

You've actually raised another issue with codex based kill teams. With KT list teams, you just follow the requirements as normal, with any Unusual Weapons a bonus. With codex-based teams however, the building requirements is only for when you actually create your team, not for a campaign. So as soon as you finish your first game you can buy as many special weapons as you like... This is another reason why I want to get all the KT lists done soon so i can remove the option for codex-lists... Unless you have an idea that could fix this?

At the end of every battle any Death Company that was not injured during battle counts as injured as a consequence of the Black Rage devouring their sanity. You can ignore this rule by paying 5 points from your Points Store during the Post Battle Sequence to put the model in stasis.

This is pretty cool, but I really wanted to keep the KT lists free of campaign stuff, so people who want a simple one-off game can do so. In the future, I want to do special 'campaign rules' for each army. Including rules for black rage, dark eldar slaves, ork teef, grey knights bathing in sister of battle blood, etc. Of course if you want to have a go at the document yourself your more than welcome too!

I played another two games this weekend; one went well, one was a nightmare, here are some notes I took.

Follow-up
Post Battle Sequence
Injury - In the first game of the weekend I was able to wipe all my opponents models from the board, but took a crippling blow when my 45pt Death Company model died. Unfortunately my Team Leader hadn't earned a skill yet, so I couldn't roll medic.

• It would be great if you could sell the wargear from a dead model to help offset their loss. My DC was 20pts + 10pts (hand flamer) + 15pts (jump pack), most of his cost was in war gear, and given my poor requisition rolls turning the 45pt loss to a 33pt loss would have been a big help.
• It would be nice if Unique Weapons could be transferred to models eligible to equip it when one owner dies. It would help enrich the narrative and give specific armies character.
• One thought was the winner could roll 2D6 and choose for the Injury table; given the assumption that after the battle they have the field to themselves and are more able to tend to the wounded.

Requisition - Winner rolling 2D6 and choosing is a good idea in theory and practice. We actually forgot to do that, and on my third consecutive victory I rolled a third consecutive 1 which had become crippling by that point in the campaign.

Asault

• Quick-Rolling helped.
• Allowing models in base contact with friendly models in base contact with the enemy get into combat was a huge help and time saver.
• The revised Overwatch rules played out well, no one died from overwatch in our games… but it gave us a little more hope that our armies wouldn't be flat footed during a charge.

Destructible Objectives

• We liked the clarification for attempting to destroy and objective in the movement phase.
• Sometimes your lucky, sometimes your not; I had a really hard time rolling 6's on the objective.
  • What if the difficulty could be lowered by one for each turn a model remains in base contact with the objective.
  • Or, if the model could attempt to destroy in the Shooting and/or Assault Phase instead of participating in the respective phase.

"Groups"
I have an idea I'd like to pitch, I'm calling them "groups" for lack of a better name. One of the most time consuming parts of the game and post battle sequence are keeping track of similar models, groups are meant to simplify the process.
Basically when you buy a group of a certain model type you would add each model to your roster and track their equipment and injuries normally, you would also add a "group". After a battle, instead of leveling the models you would level the group they belong to (as if it was one model). This assumes that the group trains and fights as a team and that they're likely to boost the same stats or learn the same skill as a team.
Model costs would be reflected by their base value + equipment + group value (as we're moving to EXP levels having a point value). You would be able to add/replace additional models to the group, but you pay a greater cost to find a worthy addition or successor. A model could only ever belong to one group, all models in the group must be of the same type (eg. Tactical Marines), if all members of a group die then the group is disbanded.

Thanks for your feedback again, ive added most of this stuff to the update list for the campaign rules (its pretty big now). Some notes on a few things:

Im not sure how to balance the 'death' situation. You were very unfortunate to lose such an expensive model! I see two ways we could fix this:

- Your idea, where you may sell any optional equipment the dead models own (for half cost of course). So you would gain 12 points back from your 45pt death company model. Not much, but helps.
- We could change the injury table to closer represent the Leader table, by having 1-3 Dead! and 4-6 Major Injury. Although this would even more complexity, especially if you are rolling for lots of guys.

Ok, Unique Weapons are pretty important to team campaign progression, but we need some sort of mechanic where they have a chance to lose them on death. Maybe the opposite team could have a chance to loot it?! Something like:

"If a model with a Unique Weapon rolls the Dead! result on the Injury table, the artefact could be taken by the enemy! If the team with the Unique Weapon has won this game, they may recover the item without risk - the Unique Weapon may then be given to any model in their team that has the ability to use it (i.e. has the base item in their options). If there are no models eligible the item is lost. If the team has lost their game however, roll a d6. On a 1-3 the enemy Leader has captured the weapon as a trophy and may use the Unique Weapon even if he would normally not be able to! If the enemy Leader has rolled a Dead! result after the same game, the item is lost."

Objective wise, i wanted to ask everyone what they thought of the following 'Random Marker' table and rules. I might make it an optional rule, or just change the main rule if its good enough. We thought it would add a layer of 'cool' to the game, and tactics. Obviously characteristic tests are easier for more powerful models, but there would be more of the less skilled models to attempt it. So should balance out.

Random Markers
A Marker represents important objectives on the battlefield – such as sensitive plans, hostages, communication equipment, etc. Each Marker has a total of 3 'Durability Points' or DP. These DP can be lost in a number of ways depending on what 'type' the Marker is. Regardless of how they are lost, once a Marker reaches 0 DP it is disabled.

You may attempt to disable a Marker in your own Shooting phase. If you do so, you may not do any other action (shoot, run, etc.). You must be in base contact to attempt to disable a Marker, and follow the rules for doing so depending on what type the marker is. A model may not attempt to disable a Marker if they are in combat, fleeing or have gone to ground.

To determine what type a Marker is, roll on the following table for each Marker after they have been placed:

1. Place Charges - A model must place explosive charges to destroy a vital enemy supply line. The model must take a Weapon Skill test, if successful the Marker loses 1 DP.
2. Recover Data - A model must hack into a cogitators databanks and retreat or vital data. The model must take a Initiative test, if successful the Marker loses 1 DP.
3. Rescue Hostage - A model must untie and secure an important hostage. The model must take a Strength test, if successful the Marker loses 1 DP.
4. Total Destruction - The only way to disable this Marker is mindless violence. The model must roll a number of D6 equal to their Attack value. For every result of 4+ the Marker loses 1 DP.
5. Toxic Specimen - A vital specimen needs to contained within a stasis field for transport, but is highly dangerous. The model must take a Toughness test, if successful the Marker loses 1 DP.
6. Assassination - An enemy commander/heretic/person needs to eliminated. The model must take a Ballistic Skill test, if successful the Marker loses 1 DP.

On your idea for Groups, its a good idea but not entirely sure how to write it. How about the player decided what models go in what groups on team creation? All models would still have to be from the same entry, and gain EXP and skills together. You can buy more models for a group but would add EXP level to cost of any new members. Maybe all models in a group need to deploy within 2" of each other, but may of course wander off afterwards?

On another campaign note, I'll definitely be created a separate 'team leader' advancement table, and simplifying the normal one. The normal one will only have access to simple skills (like outflank, stealth, etc. - ones that can be shared between the whole group easily ), whereas the team leader will have more complicated ones.

Thoughts on Death

• When we play our injury phase we pull one character up at a time, rolling their injury, moving to the next. Another idea is to roll XD6, where X is the number of injuries your team has taken, then assign the dice to the injured models and make any secondary injury rolls as needed. This would replicate battlefield triage, where the commander/medic can prioritize who gets treatment first.
• I really like the idea of models dying in the game, but am scared of it's relatively high probability. For example, in one game my ork opponent suffered 7 deaths on his team (fortunately for him, he got 50pts on his requisition roll). Here is the current probability of getting any one injury result:
  • 50%: Full Recovery
  • ~17%: Winded
  • ~17%: Dead!
  • ~17%: Physical injury...
    but that means:
    • ~6%: -1WS:
    • ~6%: -1BS
    • ~3%: -1I
    • ~3%: -1S
• One suggestion is to split the 1 roll would be "Dead!" and "Mortally Wounded: The model's injuries are so severe they can not fight in the next battle. Treat them as an injured model in next Post Battle Sequence". This gives a taste of death, but provides a chance to recover after subsequent battles, like a more severe version of "Winded".

Wargear Recovery

• Here's another spin on selling a dead model's war gear (Unique or otherwise): "Sell or Salvage: you may sell the dead model's wargear at half it's cost (as normal), or salvage it by paying half of it's cost from your Point Store and equipping to another model eligible to carry it. All war gear that isn't salvaged at the end of the Post Battle Sequence is sold". There's still a cost to losing a model and it's war gear, but it's impact isn't as dramatic.
• After talking about it with Rion (who posted on Warseer before), an enemy being able to recover your Unique Weapon adds insult to injury and leads to lots of complications on the mechanical side. We thought it would be best to avoid it all together.

Random Markers
This sounds pretty cool, but 3DP might be too tough. Imagine how that'd play if one of your Primary Objectives was Assault, ouch. How about 2DP?

Groups
I've got a few different ideas for how to handle Groups. They're getting close but not quite there, let me know if it's worth pursing or tossing. It's a tangle of ideas right now, but I think we could get to a clear and simple explanation.

• During the Experience phase any EXP earned by a model is given to its Group instead.
  • A Group may have multiple surviving models, but earns only 1 EXP for the Survive bonus.
  • If your team wins and a Group contains the Team Leader (as per codex armies) the group earns 1 EXP.
  • If the Group contains an Assassin the Group earns 1 EXP.
• Groups could be counted like a piece of war gear that uses the above rules for intercepting EXP. A model's cost would be tallied as follows:
  base cost + war gear cost + Group cost + level cost (accrued while not a member of a group) = model's total cost. If a model is to leave a group they can't sell the Group like war gear.
• A Group could be tracked as it's own roster entry. This would make more sense if we had Kill Team rosters, which is something I've been thinking about making. There are some good examples of Necromunda rosters that could be a good template for Kill Team and Groups.
• I wouldn't burden the Group mechanic with 40k's unit cohesion, its more of something that happens between battles of a campaign that benefits them in battle.

I like the idea of the Team Leader advancement table, you've established a precedent with the Injury table so it won't be a surprise when you flip to the EXP page.

For the Blood Angel's updated Army List, how would you propose upgrading my Sanguinary Novitiate to a Sanguinary Priest? I was thinking I could just pay the 10pts difference from my Point Store between battles.

Again, thanks for the time and consideration. I'm looking forward to your updates and my next game.

Sorry for slow reply, i've been on holiday and wanted another playtest game before I post. Firstly, thanks for all your feedback on the campaign system. I've finished sorting out Rules v1.3 now so the campaign rules will be my next stop.

Groups is a great idea, but really needs tightening up - how are these groups formed? Mordheim used 'similarly armed models' - i,e models exactly the same. Is this the sort of thing we want to head towards, or do we want a more flexible system?

Sorry ive messed up your team lol, thats the problem with changing and balancing points costs/unit abilities! Unfortunately Kill Team is still in development so expect that to happen a few times before its set! I would probably discuss it with your group, im sure they would let you upgrade to a priest for 10pts.

Anyway, a lot of additions in Rules v1.3, which can be found here:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzbfV0v166neYngzYjNqSVlLNEk/edit

So many in fact, I've written a change log:

Changes in Kill Team Rules v1.3
- Changed wording for climbing and jumping, added 1" and unit type exceptions.
- Added 'Hiding' rule to enable hidden models. This is converted from the old Mordheim rule that we though was great.
- Combined the Run and Fleet rules.
- Added Grenade rule - all shooting grenades have One Use Only rule.
- Added charge sub-phase ‘order of operations'
- Added Supporting Charges
- Added Diving Charges
- Added Climbing Charges
- Added Overwatch
- Added Quick-rolling
- Added Supporting Attacks
- Removed 'outnumbering' from Assault results
- Amended Squad rule to include rules for hiding and jumping/climbing.
- Changed Destructible Markers wording.
- Added Optional Rule – Destructible Terrain

This isn't quite public yet, so if you have anyone has any quick changes they think needs to be done - let me know!

Had a big chat with my group the other day, and sat down to rewrite the new campaign rules. Take a look and let me know what you think:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzbfV0v166neQkFneXppQVBqa3c/edit

LOTS of changes!

I've also updated the 'Official Codex' document with notes on how to use them in campaigns.

And in case anyone gets confused, i've changed 'Rare' to 'Special' in all rules, simply because we thought it sounded more representative - and worked in the campaign rules better.

I'll try and get the Roster Sheet done ASAP.

Ive designed a quick roster sheet in excel for people to use in campaigns:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzbfV0v166neN0RXSjhpel9vZTA/edit

Not very flashy, but does the job. Will add flashy bits later!

New Kill Team Rules v1.4 update is now available.

First of all, yes, plasma EXPLODES! We all thought plasma was a bit overpowered in Kill Team currently (hence, everyone was taking as much as they could), especially with Suppressing Fire. Making Gets Hot weaponry explode gives it a little bit of a drawback. Plus its cool.

Also in this update is the addition of new Difficult Terrain rules, stolen shamelessly from the LotR game. Its a bit more time consuming to work out than the normal 2d6 rules, but we think its a lot more immersive (and makes more sense to be honest). Plus it evens out the impact of our running rules.

The other big change is the Mission rules. I know there was a lot done in v1.3, but v1.4 really shakes them up. Gone are the random secret missions - they just didn't seem to be popular, especially as un-trustworthy people tended to just make up their secret missions... The new system is very tradition, with 5 big missions/scenarios (I couldn't make up a 6th, that will be a future update) that you simply roll a d6 for at the start of the game. The new missions are Skirmish, Relic Hunt, Last Stand, Hostage, and Sabotage.

In other Kill Team news, the Chaos Space Marines and Space Wolves team lists are live, as well as a fillable version of the updated roster sheet (download to fill and save) and the updated Legendary Heroes document for your campaigns - including a very familiar dreadnought!

Get the new Kill Team Rules here:
http://heralds-of-ruin.blogspot.co.uk/p/kill-team-rules.html

Just saw this and checked out the web site. Got me thinking this is a great way to get my son going until he has a large enough army to play against mine.

Update v1.5 is out for the core Kill Team rules. In this one we have focussed on emphasising 'cinematic' terrain, adjusting some of our existing rules to match this, and changing some of the more 'abstract' rules of 40k to be more 'real'. There is now a sixth mission (missed from the last update), and a general tidying up of rules (especially grenades, and the other missions).

Get the new Warhammer 40,000 Kill Team rules here:
http://heralds-of-ruin.blogspot.co.uk/p/kill-team-rules.html

Also in v1.5 are optional rules for Injury. Now we originally didn't want to add these, but we've had demand for it from a few people now. It is important to note that these are additional rules, and are NOT the 'official' Kill Team rules. Our game will not be balanced to take into account these optional rules. The rules are basically taken from Mordheim, with a few tweaks to make them work in 40k. They haven't really been play-tested, so if you're brave enough to try them, any feedback would be invaluable.

You can now download the first 'mission' document, called The Raid. Its basically an attacker/defender mission using sentries - hearkening back to the old Kill Team rules from white dwarf! It even includes mission wargear such as wirecutters, grapnels, las-traps (laser beams), etc.

On the KT lists front, I'm still working on the Tau list ready to be play-tested by the group. But I have been through the current lists and added tweaks, new wargear, etc. So it's worth seeing if your list has been updated.

Hi my friends are playing your rules for the 1st time tonight and we have 5 different teams and two tables so we are hoping to get a few games done. we have orks, eldar, dark eldar, dark angels and vanilla marines so far so we are looking forward to a good battle. I will post up the details and any questions we have if that's ok. I think we will probably do a campaign as a few of us were playing necromunda and enjoyed the leveling up aspect.

Thanks for your post Humiestompa! Glad to see someone from Dakka is taking up KT again. I havn't posted on this forum for a while because there didn't seem to be any interest.

I've just updated the Space Marine list to the new format - to coincide with the new look/rules for KT v1.6 and Campaign v1.2 - so let me know what your SM player thinks of the changes. It shouldn't be too long before the Orks get an update either.

Let me know if you have any questions or feedback while playing your campaign!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Scrap that, the Ork update is live! Check it out and let me know what you think.

This looks really fun! Sadly I won't get to try it out til summer break, but looks great.

A zoanthrope and 14 Termagantz wit devourers hehe