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.

Racerguy180 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Maybe the first release won't be an Ash Wastes Nomad book, but instead a "Gangs of the Ash Wastes" book that covers all the gangs.

That way they can get us to buy that as they slowly invalidate each chapter over the next two years of individual gang book releases.

Why so pessimistic???

It's H.B.M.C that's his default setting

Two years is not pessimistic at all, if you look at how many of the factions will need a vehicle kit with rules updated, it's actually a speedy turn around.

I do wonder if they will ever go back to a typical gang release with a new 10 man gang box or if now the vehicles is the new norm.

Someone not interested in car games it sounds like the next few years will be all about you actually clearing the Necromunda pile of shame rather than getting new kits. I can live with that.

 Rolsheen wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Maybe the first release won't be an Ash Wastes Nomad book, but instead a "Gangs of the Ash Wastes" book that covers all the gangs.

That way they can get us to buy that as they slowly invalidate each chapter over the next two years of individual gang book releases.

Why so pessimistic???

It's H.B.M.C that's his default setting

And nearly always it turns out he was correct in retrospect. You really have to default to extreme pessimism when it comes to GW.

 Rolsheen wrote:
It's H.B.M.C that's his default setting

Not true. I'm an eternal optimist. I always want the best for this game. I'm just not dumb enough to assume that that will always be the case.

For most part, when I'm wrong about something, it's good for the game.

 Rolsheen wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Maybe the first release won't be an Ash Wastes Nomad book, but instead a "Gangs of the Ash Wastes" book that covers all the gangs.

That way they can get us to buy that as they slowly invalidate each chapter over the next two years of individual gang book releases.

Why so pessimistic???

It's H.B.M.C that's his default setting

Why don't you just wait and see how it all turns out?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
This is doing the rounds on social media

In classic GW fasion the Ash wastes rulebook and campaign is not actually balanced from the Ashwastes box.
The three gangs (Van Sarr, Nomads, and Orlocks) get 400 additional credits to spend on vehicles. while everyone else gets to wait for their vehicle rulebook expansion. (They get zero because they don't have access to any vehicles.) So the 300$ you drop on Ashwastes to get the rulebook lets you hope in a few months or so that they'll release another rulebook (Which they'll probably charge 50$ for.) That actually lets you play the game... assuming they release the rulebook for all the gangs vehicles (Which they may just release 1 for each individual gang massively hiking up the total.)
What on earth could go wrong with this You effectively have to create house rules and third party vehicles with no official GW rule set to even play Ashwastes in a remotely balanced way out of 300$ box.
There are also vehicle upgrades that will exist, but they aren't in the Ashwastes rulebook.
Definately another rulebook that actually tells you how to play with vehicles "Actually" coming down the line.

Basicaly all the most cynical expectations from this thread combined have actualy happened.

This is not entirely accurate!

I think the best way to understand this is that the Core Rulebook is gold, and an excellent update to the 2018 Rulebook (lots of lessons learned). The structure is better. The vehicle rules are actually excellent, and take older vehicle rules and really integrate them well into the activation system. Like the 2018 rulebook this book features a campaign and its mechanics, but not the "gang parts" or the trading post or that, which were in GotU.

So there will be some kind of GotU book forthcoming, and presumably both books were meant to come out with the box, but delays or business strategy or whatever else. It would have been nice if this was said, but of course GW doesn't do that in their communications. Frustrating but when you consider that the original Ash Wastes did take about eight months to be finished, kind of also very in the model of Specialist Games in the 2000s or the late 2010s.

This also explains the Trading Post update pdf; that's taking the rules from this forthcoming book, which we also need at the moment, since weapon traits are not in the core rulebook, but we do need them.

Now, so yes, in the box Hive War-esque rules for the Ash Waste Nomads and contained Orlocks as part of the instructions leaflet (and mentions look at supplements for the full rules!) As said on the website "basic gang rules", not proper rules. Just like Hive War and also Underhive. There are *not* rules for Van Saar, the author of that social media post was - without explicitly saying it - suggesting to add Mounted as a condition to Neoteks - but this isn't mentioned or suggested in the box, so they are adding some disinformation using that sense of Van Saar OP-ness outrage for rhetoric!

Anyway, I have a key frustration with this release - the lack of generic rules. I agree with them that its frustrating that gangs cannot all participate. But equally it of course makes sense looking at 2018's dual books, which was such a good solution after that painful Gang War year.

However, in the actual rulebook you can find the profile for an Ash Rig, you can find the differences that being Wheeled, Tracked or a Skimmer means, you can read how transporting infantry on vehicles works, you can find about crew and crew lasting injuries, and vehicles getting wrecked and needing repair; you can read about falling off vehicles, and fighting on them, and close combat and so on. Get creative! They mention with horror house rules - what horror! They also mention balance; good god, it's Necromunda, what is balance, the official rules are certainly not that....

If you want to form your own opinion just read the book at https://youtu.be/ADoIYKGYcjA?t=1815

@Petitioner´s City:

Excellent vehicle rules? Beg to differ. Vehicles are treated like gangers with a couple of extra actions and a damage table. There is also ONLY one vehicle present in the core rules. I wouldn´t call this excellent but rather the direct opposite. People who want better vehicle rules might want to use their Google-Fu and take a look at Car Wars Compendium (147 pages dedicated to vehicular combat).

House orlock gang list forced all fighters to have mesh armor, but wait ganger is actually 5 credit cheaper now

Don't know why they even do this, the text only filled half of the pages, there're still plenty of stuff from house of iron other than the gang and equpment list

 Strg Alt wrote:
@Petitioner´s City:

Excellent vehicle rules? Beg to differ. Vehicles are treated like gangers with a couple of extra actions and a damage table. There is also ONLY one vehicle present in the core rules. I wouldn´t call this excellent but rather the direct opposite. People who want better vehicle rules might want to use their Google-Fu and take a look at Car Wars Compendium (147 pages dedicated to vehicular combat).

They move differently, they receive hits differently, they suffer the consequences of being hit differently, they have a different advancement system, and different injury system, and so on? I'd argue mechanically they are different enough without importing into the game a separate rules system which would bog it down even more? Like this is a nice mesh of 2nd and 3rd edition 40k, gorkamorka and old ash wastes with modernmunda.

I was just talking about mechanical rules which I think are pretty excellent; it's ok to disagree

Anyway mechanical rules are different from characteristic profiles, and as I said above, the latter shouldn't have been expected in an update to the 2018 core rulebook? I do agree it's disappointing, but it's also logical, as that book itself only had two profiles in it too?

 PetitionersCity wrote:
Anyway mechanical rules are different from characteristic profiles, and as I said above, the latter shouldn't have been expected in an update to the 2018 core rulebook? I do agree it's disappointing, but it's also logical, as that book itself only had two profiles in it too?

We really should. The fact that GW wants to nickel and dime us to oblivion don't change that. If you can't have full profiles in a $300 box set... well.

As i said, it's ok to disagree; I don't know if I'd get too upset about it - I had my own moment lamenting it yesterday in the Sump City Radio group, but then I got over it - it is frustrating, but it's also logical, as i said, and I should have expected it.

Anyway, this book (and the next ones) will end up online, be it nicely scanned pdfs, Topsy's work, Shoggoth's work and/or another's work. You don't need to buy it, and as I said above, you can house rule - and perhaps create what you'd really want from the game, rather than rely on SG's sometimes problematic record on this front?

But there are many great tools in the AWR, and I think with a calmer head (as I eventually had) you'll see how good the mechanics are, and then spin off from it, or just wait - whatever is your pick

I'm not sure you can claim "it'll be pirated anyway" as a reason to claim a book isn't good.

I'm saying the book is good though, and I think it's even an excellent book once I moved on past initial disappointment of what I thought it should have. When eventually you read it, or if you do read it closely using the S&B review, why not read it with an open mind?

And when you have cooler heads, you'll possibly see why I think it is a great rulebook, possibly think the opposite based on what it is, not what it isnt.

If the former maybe you'll then move to making up some interim rules (my choice) to guide player conversions, or just wait, or just convert anyway irrespective of rules.

If you don't like it, what do you do? Grumble on an internet forum and not move on? Or perhaps you'll decide to move on, and perhaps even to go back to the Magazine days by Kinrade, Ward and Witter of the first edition rules, or the SG rules of Reiner adapting the earlier content for second edition. Or just something else.

Up to you guys, and all are valid responses.

Yes I wish there was a leaflet with the blessed generic info, but there isn't and there is something bigger coming instead. And in the meantime nothing wrong with house rules; easy enough to go back to either past version of the wastes, or any of the fan editions for modernmunda from the past five years, until we have those rules, which of course you don't need to use as you might have made better

 PetitionersCity wrote:
I'm saying the book is good though, and I think it's even an excellent book once I moved on past initial disappointment of what I thought it should have. When eventually you read it, or if you do read it closely using the S&B review, why not read it with an open mind?

And when you have cooler heads, you'll possibly see why I think it is a great rulebook, possibly think the opposite based on what it is, not what it isnt.

If the former maybe you'll then move to making up some interim rules (my choice) to guide player conversions, or just wait, or just convert anyway irrespective of rules.

If you don't like it, what do you do? Grumble on an internet forum and not move on? Or perhaps you'll decide to move on, and perhaps even to go back to the Magazine days by Kinrade, Ward and Witter of the first edition rules, or the SG rules of Reiner adapting the earlier content for second edition. Or just something else.

Up to you guys, and all are valid responses.

Yes I wish there was a leaflet with the blessed generic info, but there isn't and there is something bigger coming instead. And in the meantime nothing wrong with house rules; easy enough to go back to either past version of the wastes, or any of the fan editions for modernmunda from the past five years, until we have those rules, which of course you don't need to use as you might have made better

I think its just another nail in the thought that GW makes rules to sell minis or makes rules to sell games, thats not the case anymore...now Its more GW makes rules to sell more rules by forcing you to get silly amounts of books that clash with each other or in this case are just incomplete.
Not a pickle for me but can respect the disappointment on people invested in GW rulesets.

So if I manage to win the lottery and can thus afford to pick up Ash Wastes I couldn't even run a Necromanda campaign with my buddies out of the box? It doesn't have complete rules?

Is that correct?

Yeah I understand that Navarro, I think that disappointment is justifiable - but I also think we as a community have many resources that help with those issues, be it the work of Topsy or Shoggoth, or our own individual ingenuity.

 PetitionersCity wrote:
Yeah I understand that Navarro, I think that disappointment is justifiable - but I also think we as a community have many resources that help with those issues, be it the work of Topsy or Shoggoth, or our own individual ingenuity.

How does that discharge GW of the responsibility of making their books complete, in any way, shape or form?

I think we disagree Albertorius. You have a set view of what X should be. I understand why you are saying this, but I am (much?) more flexible and feel not so strongly that X needs to be what you view it should be. As youll see above I have written in a concessionary, and empathetic manner, that has tried to offer positive solution while continually understanding and refering back to my own initial disappointment. But I don't think you want that at the moment, or perhaps even ever, because of that set idea of X.

Thus we have conflict, and perhaps no resolution. Ah well. Neither of us is more right than the other, since of course it's all subjective. But it's a bit of a shame this thread doesn't have space for expressions of positivity and negativity, or indeed even balanced opinions as I tried above.

 PetitionersCity wrote:
I think we disagree Albertorius. You have a set view of what X should be. I understand why you are saying this, but I am (much?) more flexible and feel not so strongly that X needs to be what you view it should be. As youll see above I have written in a concessionary, and empathetic manner, that has tried to offer positive solution while continually understanding and refering back to my own initial disappointment. But I don't think you want that at the moment, or perhaps even ever, because of that set idea of X.

Thus we have conflict, and perhaps no resolution. Ah well. Neither of us is more right than the other, since of course it's all subjective. But it's a bit of a shame this thread doesn't have space for expressions of positivity and negativity, or indeed even balanced opinions as I tried above.

Yes, I am of the opinion that when you buy a game, you should get the game, not just a small subset of it. Particularly when said game costs $300. You can then expand on it via sourcebooks or whatever... but the game should be a full game. This is not it.

And this is why GW can get away with these practices.

 PetitionersCity wrote:
I think we disagree Albertorius. You have a set view of what X should be. I understand why you are saying this, but I am (much?) more flexible and feel not so strongly that X needs to be what you view it should be. As youll see above I have written in a concessionary, and empathetic manner, that has tried to offer positive solution while continually understanding and refering back to my own initial disappointment. But I don't think you want that at the moment, or perhaps even ever, because of that set idea of X.

Thus we have conflict, and perhaps no resolution. Ah well. Neither of us is more right than the other, since of course it's all subjective. But it's a bit of a shame this thread doesn't have space for expressions of positivity and negativity, or indeed even balanced opinions as I tried above.

And here is the case in point on why GW can keep getting away with this.

 Albertorius wrote:

Yes, I am of the opinion that when you buy a game, you should get the game, not just a small subset of it. Particularly when said game costs $300. You can then expand on it via sourcebooks or whatever... but the game should be a full game. This is not it.

As I understand it from watching several Youtube reviews/playtests Ash Wastes is a full (boxed) game.
It works as it is supposed to, i.e. you can fight with the included fighters.

In time it will evolve into a full expansion to Necromunda with vehicle rules (and minis) for many gangs (probably not all).
Not having that from the start is not (for me) neither unexpected nor bad (I prefer good, balanced and playested rules - which will take GW quite some time).

——-

I really hope the new rulebook will be better than the rest of the Newcromunda books - however I have my doubts…

For instance, as I understand it, the rules for ”Vehicle Vision Arcs” makes a short and broad vehicle much better than a long narrow one!
”Determine a vehicle’s vision arc by drawing two imaginary lines through the corners of the vehicle …”
Thus, broadening the wheelbase of a quad will not only make it look less prone to tipping over - but also give a much wider forward vision arc.

Could have just write some pages as band aid for other gangs : GSC mercenaries, geez throw some ork buggies and bike in wouldn't hurt

Pretty sure that since orks go toe to toe with marines, that common gangers and such are not equipped to deal with an actual full ork biker band

By toe to toe you meant 30 to 1 then yes they are "equal"

And the Krieg from the Kill team trailer kill the stronger "Kommando" orks and nob just fine with lasgun and chainsword, 1 or 2 orks wouldn't be a problem.

 kendoka wrote:
As I understand it from watching several Youtube reviews/playtests Ash Wastes is a full (boxed) game.

Technically correct is kind of the worst way of being correct. It's a Necromunda exansion, too... can you play with anything else at all from Necromunda?

Chopstick wrote:
Could have just write some pages as band aid for other gangs : GSC mercenaries, geez throw some ork buggies and bike in wouldn't hurt

Surely that’s how they will sell some additional White Dwarf copies, by writing up some band aid stuff for other gangs. Maybe even single gangs featured in separate articles to maximize profits.

As I said earlier in the thread, if the cards had been available in the uk, I would have bought the cards and the nomads.

Thinking more clearly now, I realise I wouldn't have the rules for the Nomads. Does anyone know if they'll come out in a book soon. Do any rules have a release date?

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Thinking more clearly now, I realise I wouldn't have the rules for the Nomads. Does anyone know if they'll come out in a book soon. Do any rules have a release date?

There's a good chance they'll announce "Book of Bugs" for Ash Waste Nomads at Warhammer Fest, or at the very least a Gangs of the Ash Wastes book that they'll slowly invalidate one gang at a time.

Rules for the Nomads, including a basic gang+weapon list are supposed to be in the instruction manuals.