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.

People are aware that GW *did* attempt to reboot Necromunda with Necromunda : Underhive, right?

The creative types in the studio tried to relaunch Necromunda without as much of the 2E stuff (Sustained Fire), but it just didn't sell well enough to justify continuing.

Besides, if you want to play Mordheim minus the campaign, Malifaux does a great job of it. Similarly, I think Infinity does a great job of standing in for what Necromunda might have become. And obviously, Mantic has the Blood Bowl thing covered, while X-Wing is absolutely dominating what Aeronautica Imperialis wished it could have been.

But what's really done in the very small skirmishes are the Kickstarter miniatures boardgames. For the same $100 you might have spent on a Mordheim/Nec/BB/AI, you can get a hugely-produced game. $90 for the Conan game is a incredible amount of play value, assuming it ever ships.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
People are aware that GW *did* attempt to reboot Necromunda with Necromunda : Underhive, right?

The creative types in the studio tried to relaunch Necromunda without as much of the 2E stuff (Sustained Fire), but it just didn't sell well enough to justify continuing.

Besides, if you want to play Mordheim minus the campaign, Malifaux does a great job of it. Similarly, I think Infinity does a great job of standing in for what Necromunda might have become. And obviously, Mantic has the Blood Bowl thing covered, while X-Wing is absolutely dominating what Aeronautica Imperialis wished it could have been.

But what's really done in the very small skirmishes are the Kickstarter miniatures boardgames. For the same $100 you might have spent on a Mordheim/Nec/BB/AI, you can get a hugely-produced game. $90 for the Conan game is a incredible amount of play value, assuming it ever ships.

Actually... I have to admit to never having heard of Underhive. Despite it coming out long enough ago that I stilled played GW games - though after I had given up on White Dwarf.

And I really do not want to 'play Mordheim minus the campaign'. That is the number one reason that I do not play Malifaux - it is missing what I consider the best part of the game.

Deadzone comes a heck of a lot closer to scratching my Necromunda itch than Malifaux comes to scratching the much more severe Mordheim itch.

The Auld Grump

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
People are aware that GW *did* attempt to reboot Necromunda with Necromunda : Underhive, right?

Oh sure. That turned up in the local GW store along with Epic: Armageddon and the other SGs, in one last gasp to show some of us what a shower of gak 40K and FB were, before GW yanked the plug. I still have the half-assembled Kroot Escher proxies lying around here somewhere.

Besides, if you want to play Mordheim minus the campaign, Malifaux does a great job of it.

I wasn't aware Malifaux had included Middenheim youngbloods and Skaven warpstone hunters.

Oooor if you want to play Mordheim, look here.

(Fun fact: I can't really stand Malifaux either)

Different strokes for different folks. Some people like RPG / league / campaign elements, others don't. Personally, I like the Mordheim campaign, along with things like the WFB6 Border Princes campaign (that was pretty fun). But it appears to be a minority of minis gamers who just like a quick fight and then to see what happens afterward. With my reduced commitment to regular gaming, in favor of RL stuff, Malifaux and such seem awfully attractive compared to campaign-centric things like Mordheim or mass volume things like Warhammer Fantasy.

WRT "coreheim", nice link. For how much I play, the black book is enough (and very good!).

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Actually... I have to admit to never having heard of Underhive. Despite it coming out long enough ago that I stilled played GW games - though after I had given up on White Dwarf.

And I really do not want to 'play Mordheim minus the campaign'. That is the number one reason that I do not play Malifaux - it is missing what I consider the best part of the game.

Deadzone comes a heck of a lot closer to scratching my Necromunda itch than Malifaux comes to scratching the much more severe Mordheim itch.

The Auld Grump

As for Underhive, You might have heard of it without realizing it. If you downloaded the "living rulebook" from GW or the many other places it was/is available, you were/are getting a slightly edited version of what was previously in print as "Underhive". Underhive was a nice attempt to put it all (Necro and Outlanders) in one book and fix a few things, but IIRC, it didn't add much to the game setting and I don't think it included everything from the "Outlanders" expansion. The missing outlanders stuff was eventually all available online, but essentially Underhive was an edition that had less in print than the original version.

I always wanted to play Mordheim but never got the chance. It's not quite as detailed a game as Mordheim, but I've found that Song of Blades and Heroes with it's "...Deeds and Glory" campaign expansion more than scratches my itch for warband skirmish fantasy campaigns. We do a summer campaign each year at the club . Usually around 6 meetings long which means that each player usually gets in anywhere from 6-10 games. It always takes place in the fictional Qaarra setting the club has created. You can see last summer's campaign games here:
http://chicagoskirmish.blogspot.com/2014/09/quake-mourn-campaign-report-session-5_26.html

Though there is talk of trying Necromunda, at this point. I doubt we'd ever do Mordheim now. The setting and warbands just dosn't cover all the various kinds of warbands we like to use. Song of Blades on the other hand is wide open for warband creation.

Yeah, the problem with Underhive is that it didn't simply reprint everything in the Necromunda hardback (rules, Sourcebook & Outlanders).

-

 Bottle wrote:
If you're gonna play Necro it has to be with the original rules. None of this house weapon list or hand flamers are one shot flamer nonsense. I still play Necro by the original rules only, they are the best

I have all the original books and box sets for the game. I like reading them for the rules perspective compared to "modern day" rules.
I like the gang progression tables and income, can be quite the campaign rules.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Different strokes for different folks. Some people like RPG / league / campaign elements, others don't. Personally, I like the Mordheim campaign, along with things like the WFB6 Border Princes campaign (that was pretty fun). But it appears to be a minority of minis gamers who just like a quick fight and then to see what happens afterward. With my reduced commitment to regular gaming, in favor of RL stuff, Malifaux and such seem awfully attractive compared to campaign-centric things like Mordheim or mass volume things like Warhammer Fantasy.

WRT "coreheim", nice link. For how much I play, the black book is enough (and very good!).

When only two options are available it is hard to truly compare if a Campaign- centric game vs pure skirmish games and mass volume games ( which still do not work well in 28mm and I myself have never enjoyed just too set my view on this). I would argue when it is done Campaign- Centric games can have just as much appeal compared too the other two. I tried out a game called Strange Aeons and the very first thing I came to love about the game was the time you spent outside of the game leveling up your group, buying them new equipment and seeing the results of each game as it takes its effects on them, making some better, some worst and more often than not some great comedy ensued with certain traits.

These type of games are great for building character in your force, giving meaning and names too your characters, SEEING A STORY PROGRESS is far more enjoyable to myself and brings much more context and meaning into games than the simple " Fight to the death, unit a or b it doesn't matter what happens too them , as long as we win". This is one of the reasons RPGs are so enjoyable when done right, they create stories and "Forge the narrative ".

I think they can be as ever bit as popular as either of the other two. However I also do see the strengths in a quick pick up game, however campaign centric games can do this as well setting a point limit and building the force you want too use I still find more enjoyable than the average standard skirmish game. It is what I feel is really lacking in Infinity, Malifaux, Hordes and Warmachine as they feel as though they are missing something and are lacking in this area.

underfire wargaming wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Different strokes for different folks. Some people like RPG / league / campaign elements, others don't. Personally, I like the Mordheim campaign, along with things like the WFB6 Border Princes campaign (that was pretty fun). But it appears to be a minority of minis gamers who just like a quick fight and then to see what happens afterward. With my reduced commitment to regular gaming, in favor of RL stuff, Malifaux and such seem awfully attractive compared to campaign-centric things like Mordheim or mass volume things like Warhammer Fantasy.

WRT "coreheim", nice link. For how much I play, the black book is enough (and very good!).

When only two options are available it is hard to truly compare if a Campaign- centric game vs pure skirmish games and mass volume games ( which still do not work well in 28mm and I myself have never enjoyed just too set my view on this). I would argue when it is done Campaign- Centric games can have just as much appeal compared too the other two. I tried out a game called Strange Aeons and the very first thing I came to love about the game was the time you spent outside of the game leveling up your group, buying them new equipment and seeing the results of each game as it takes its effects on them, making some better, some worst and more often than not some great comedy ensued with certain traits.

These type of games are great for building character in your force, giving meaning and names too your characters, SEEING A STORY PROGRESS is far more enjoyable to myself and brings much more context and meaning into games than the simple " Fight to the death, unit a or b it doesn't matter what happens too them , as long as we win". This is one of the reasons RPGs are so enjoyable when done right, they create stories and "Forge the narrative ".

I think they can be as ever bit as popular as either of the other two. However I also do see the strengths in a quick pick up game, however campaign centric games can do this as well setting a point limit and building the force you want too use I still find more enjoyable than the average standard skirmish game. It is what I feel is really lacking in Infinity, Malifaux, Hordes and Warmachine as they feel as though they are missing something and are lacking in this area.

Just a point - Malifaux book 3 is in beta, and has a campaign system. Looks pretty fun, though doesn't go to the depth Mordheim or Necromunda did with individual model customisation. You use standard profiles, but they can gain skils and loot, or carried over debuffs or outright death (or being captured) when being reduced to 0 wounds.

 -Loki- wrote:

Just a point - Malifaux book 3 is in beta, and has a campaign system.

And Malifaux book 2 was released... how many months ago?

I feel like GW's legacy isn't just freeing up gaming categories and niches, but encouraging the new guys who take up the space to act like them, in ways, too.

Would love to see Mordheim rebooted.

GW could make some excellent plastic buildings rather than the flimsy card ones.

 scarletsquig wrote:
Would love to see Mordheim rebooted.

GW could make some excellent plastic buildings rather than the flimsy card ones.

i like their "buildings" they have now. of course, not everyone wants to play in a war torn ruined wreck. Many will want to play in functional buildings that have not been blown to pieces yet.
I got a buttload of buildings from Dust miniatures (14 actual sets and another 3 sets worth out of expansions) and they look GREAT and could be assembled to fit necromunda as well. The Dust makers claim they lost a lot of money on buildings but i think that was because not enough gamers from "other games like 40k" have been exposed to them....
http://store.fantasyflightgames.com/productdetails.cfm?SKU=DT040
Moduler to be put together in different ways and levels and easily "destroyed' for those buildings you DO want ruined. If someone wanted a buttload of them, they could probably talk a deal as fantasy flight is trying to get rid of their entire DUST stock and rumor has it they have a huge stock of this.

Didn't GW print conversion rules for using Mordheim warbands in WFB similar in respect to the old RoC Warbands?

Or was that just a dream I had?

 -Loki- wrote:

underfire wargaming wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Different strokes for different folks. Some people like RPG / league / campaign elements, others don't. Personally, I like the Mordheim campaign, along with things like the WFB6 Border Princes campaign (that was pretty fun). But it appears to be a minority of minis gamers who just like a quick fight and then to see what happens afterward. With my reduced commitment to regular gaming, in favor of RL stuff, Malifaux and such seem awfully attractive compared to campaign-centric things like Mordheim or mass volume things like Warhammer Fantasy.

WRT "coreheim", nice link. For how much I play, the black book is enough (and very good!).

When only two options are available it is hard to truly compare if a Campaign- centric game vs pure skirmish games and mass volume games ( which still do not work well in 28mm and I myself have never enjoyed just too set my view on this). I would argue when it is done Campaign- Centric games can have just as much appeal compared too the other two. I tried out a game called Strange Aeons and the very first thing I came to love about the game was the time you spent outside of the game leveling up your group, buying them new equipment and seeing the results of each game as it takes its effects on them, making some better, some worst and more often than not some great comedy ensued with certain traits.

These type of games are great for building character in your force, giving meaning and names too your characters, SEEING A STORY PROGRESS is far more enjoyable to myself and brings much more context and meaning into games than the simple " Fight to the death, unit a or b it doesn't matter what happens too them , as long as we win". This is one of the reasons RPGs are so enjoyable when done right, they create stories and "Forge the narrative ".

I think they can be as ever bit as popular as either of the other two. However I also do see the strengths in a quick pick up game, however campaign centric games can do this as well setting a point limit and building the force you want too use I still find more enjoyable than the average standard skirmish game. It is what I feel is really lacking in Infinity, Malifaux, Hordes and Warmachine as they feel as though they are missing something and are lacking in this area.

Just a point - Malifaux book 3 is in beta, and has a campaign system. Looks pretty fun, though doesn't go to the depth Mordheim or Necromunda did with individual model customisation. You use standard profiles, but they can gain skils and loot, or carried over debuffs or outright death (or being captured) when being reduced to 0 wounds.

That is very interesting to know, thank you for sharing this , it will be interesting too see their take on this style of game!.

I think the writing was on the wall as soon as the specialist games moniker was attached to them.
It was one of the worst mistakes GW have made in my book, Epic and Necromunda were some of the best games I have played, their loss I guess.

I have tried some of the newer alternatives like dropzone commander and infinity, and while I enjoyed them I was not enticed enough to actually splash out on them.

Hopefully one day maybe GW or someone who inherits the rights might actually bring them back, I can hope right ??

 EVIL INC wrote:


i like their "buildings" they have now. of course, not everyone wants to play in a war torn ruined wreck. Many will want to play in functional buildings that have not been blown to pieces yet.
I got a buttload of buildings from Dust miniatures (14 actual sets and another 3 sets worth out of expansions) and they look GREAT and could be assembled to fit necromunda as well. The Dust makers claim they lost a lot of money on buildings but i think that was because not enough gamers from "other games like 40k" have been exposed to them....
http://store.fantasyflightgames.com/productdetails.cfm?SKU=DT040
Moduler to be put together in different ways and levels and easily "destroyed' for those buildings you DO want ruined. If someone wanted a buttload of them, they could probably talk a deal as fantasy flight is trying to get rid of their entire DUST stock and rumor has it they have a huge stock of this.

I've not played Mordheim, but weren't the ruined buildings kind of central to the setting and gameplay? In general I prefer intact buildings myself for fantasy gaming.

As for the Dust Tactics buildings, I think they're great, and I've built up quite a few of them:
http://chicagoskirmish.blogspot.com/2015/01/fully-painted-dust-tactics-warzone.html
but it would take quite a suspension of disbelief to put them in a medieval setting or anywhere before the 1800's. However, I am hoping for a repeat of the holiday sale where they were blowing them out for $9. I bought 9 boxes and have almost entirely used them up.

I actually meant for necromunda although they would also work great in 40k too.

 Eilif wrote:
I think you're forgetting even though they all died (none of them supplanted GW of course), Void, Warzone, possibly Vor and others, all seized market share for a while. All of these games were around long enough for multiple years, most lasted multiple editions and they stuck around long enough to build up quite extensive miniatures lines. GW was more dominant then, but in their time Warzone and Void probably had a share of the sci-fi minis market shares that compared to infinity or Malifaux or maybe even mid-00s Warmachine.

I suspect that Warzone had more than that. In some areas it had pretty much taken over from 2nd ed 40K before 3rd ed 40k was released.

See if they came out with a BFG release that worked in concert with a 40k campaign system, I'd be all over that. The current campaigns with two missions and a dozen formations doesn't appeal to me at all. The weak GW kill team rules are evidence that they're simply not interested in using skirmish games as a gateway, though they absolutely should. It'd be easy to build a pseudo subscription model with a core warband and periodic single model releases a la Infinity. So you get people buying in a couple figures every month or so. Then after a year they're already half way to a small 40k force and it's an easier step to full 40k.

Mordheim is great, would love a new release. A skirmish WFB would actually maybe get me into WFB.

 TheSilo wrote:
See if they came out with a BFG release that worked in concert with a 40k campaign system, I'd be all over that. The current campaigns with two missions and a dozen formations doesn't appeal to me at all. .

I would go further than that, and say that a campaign book for a system assault that tied in BFG, Epic, 40K and Kill Team level battles would be pretty cool... although the market for it would be somewhat limited, since it would only be a minority of players who would actually play all three games.

 insaniak wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:
See if they came out with a BFG release that worked in concert with a 40k campaign system, I'd be all over that. The current campaigns with two missions and a dozen formations doesn't appeal to me at all. .

I would go further than that, and say that a campaign book for a system assault that tied in BFG, Epic, 40K and Kill Team level battles would be pretty cool... although the market for it would be somewhat limited, since it would only be a minority of players who would actually play all three games.

But see, if they'd maintained each of those communities I'd be a great way to cross market them and get people into the other game. I'd much rather have an interesting BFG system supplement than another super heavy, flyer, or formation supplement. Space battles and campaigns would add dynamic new elements rather than straining the limits of the 40k ruleset.

 insaniak wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:
See if they came out with a BFG release that worked in concert with a 40k campaign system, I'd be all over that. The current campaigns with two missions and a dozen formations doesn't appeal to me at all. .

I would go further than that, and say that a campaign book for a system assault that tied in BFG, Epic, 40K and Kill Team level battles would be pretty cool... although the market for it would be somewhat limited, since it would only be a minority of players who would actually play all three games.

I'm kind of surprised nothing like this was ever tried. A book that would allow for linking the games in a campaign setting and transferring units from one game to the next. Sure it might not have been played that often, but how many folks played Planetstorm all the way through or regularly play a full-sized Apocalpyse?

The Battletech Universe does such a thing. There's games for :
RPG : Time of War
Infantry platoon: Battletroops(out of print I think…)
-Platoon/Lance: Battletech
-Battalion: Alpha Strike
-Regiment: BattleForce
-Space Battle: BattleSpace
-And rules in one of the upper level rulebooks for conducting System and Galaxy wide campaigns.

Yet they are all compatible. They use the same construction system, money/credit system and there are rules for taking units and stats from one system to the next.

On the other hand, it's not that surprising. 40k itself has never really had a unified, expandable campaign system.

To be honest, the models for BFG were a bit overpriced even more so than their other models. However, it also looked like that would be one of the easiest games to proxy. Would only be a matter of finding shadow footprints of the ships to make artistist 2 dimensional representations of the out of plastic or cardboard and start playing. Has anyone done this? If so, I might give it a shot.

 EVIL INC wrote:
To be honest, the models for BFG were a bit overpriced even more so than their other models.

Just to be clear, were you referring to the prices when they were in regular circulation, put under SG or just before they were discontinued. Sorry to be a stickler, but BFG were never the cheapest models (GW has always been among the highest priced wargames producer), but they were not unattainably high in the beginning. It's just that over the years they have gone up in price in the same steep curve (perhaps steeper) as the rest of the line.

When BFG first came out, the metal was a little bit pricey, but the plastics were very reasonable. Then GW started on the long march of price hikes, as players completed their fleets, and that was that.

I believe it was a little towards the end although I remember thinking the metal ones were expensive even when it came out. It's been a looooong time ago and my memory is a little fuzzy on time frames.
When I get "into" a game, I usually go overboard and try to get every single option maxed out as much as I can so I was likely looking at the price of an entire fleet kitted out for myself and then what it would cost for my gaming buddies at home to keep up with me.
The idea still interests me but I'd much rather have two dimensional pieces in the size and shape (with some artwork to show what they are) than the full on models for pricing purposes. I think they could likely stamp them out of plastic sheets and apply decals/stickers for a decent price. This way, you could get a full on fleet with all the frills for the price of one of the older ships or a little more. Better yet, sell it as a battle fleet with all of the options maxed out to the most possible numbers so you can pick and choose all of the possible combinations. Even then, they could sell it for $50 and make a hefty profit.
They could of course, do the same with the fantasy hip based game as well.

You could do standees / counters today, with no loss in playability. It just wouldn't be as visual.

 insaniak wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:
See if they came out with a BFG release that worked in concert with a 40k campaign system, I'd be all over that. The current campaigns with two missions and a dozen formations doesn't appeal to me at all. .

I would go further than that, and say that a campaign book for a system assault that tied in BFG, Epic, 40K and Kill Team level battles would be pretty cool... although the market for it would be somewhat limited, since it would only be a minority of players who would actually play all three games.

I think some of the early FW campaign books tried this approach with scenarios for each scale of GW game. That is part of what made them so interesting.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
You could do standees / counters today, with no loss in playability. It just wouldn't be as visual.

A group of players COULD do that. However, if my group of players were to play a different group who used the actual models or their own set of "counters" there could be differences in "model" footprint or size and distances ranges.....
This is why a set release of "official" ones with the game would negate that issue and re-introduce the game itself. Not to mention, if done correctly, official countes and such would likely look much nicer than these buttons and that cardboard cutout. of course, making GW a boatload of money would also help the company out and the extra profits could be re-invested into further production, research , playtesting.....(we could hope lol)