House Rules
Page 1 of 3

Author: snailracer [ 07 Jul 2012 07:36 am ]
Post subject: House Rules

Having played the small skirmish the other day I’d like to suggest a few house rules.

I really dont enjoy the ‘can he be seen, can’t he be seen’ discussions/arguments that take place in every game and I’d like a consistent ruling that we all adhere to.

…so a fighter can only be seen by an enemy if part of their torso or head is visible. Torso is anything from groin to shoulders. The usual rules then apply for the modifiers. This is to stop dynamic minis being targeted just because they have a cool pose and their hand happens to stick out (otherwise I’d be tempted to model all of my gang in completely static, smallest are possible poses).

…also a player may declare for free at the end of movement each fighters stance. I don’t think its realistic to say that a fighter who knows an enemy are the other side of a wall would just stand there at full height so the top of his head could be targeted; he would duck down slightly so as not to be seen. I would say anything from standing to crouching is allowed as a change of stance for free. Obviously if your declared stance means you cant be seen then it stands that you probably cant see either…. (it may be worth having a set of ‘stock pose’ minis that we use to swap in for making LoS decisions and to show stances).

I would also suggest that a mini may elect to lie down. This would take 4″ of move to do (and to stand up again). minis may crawl 2″ when led down. Good for snipers…but probably not doable with a heavy weapon.


Author: BrizzleRob [ 07 Jul 2012 03:01 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I like the principle; agree that torso and head have to be seen to be targeted. The change in stature requires careful thought. What penalties/benefits would there be associated with any changes (or otherwise) in stature? Turns are snap shots of fluid motion, so electing to remain upright must come with benefit as the forward motion is maintained. Any changes in status should slow movement, and for completeness it would be beneficial to have models to reflect the body stature.

Author: snailracer [ 08 Jul 2012 08:29 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Just had a flick through the inquisitor rules to see what they say on the matter of changing stance and they actually allow it for free as part of a move action. Different ruleset I know but interesting to see.

I’m happy to go with what I have said above. I’m pretty sure in every war movie I’ve ever seen soldiers run from cover to cover with a stance that gives them the most cover and then change stance when they get to said cover. I agree its all supposed to be snap shots but its also all very abstract and therefore seems to discourage anyone from creating a dynamic mini. If one of us had a crouching mini in our gang I think we’d all be reasonable enough to say that he could count as standing if it meant he could see over a barrier to shoot so why not the other way round?

Maybe its all getting a bit too complicated but I would like to stick to the ‘if you cant see head or torso you cant target’ rule.

Author: Tubes [ 09 Jul 2012 10:03 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Some interesting proposals. However unless we all had multiple miniatures of each individual in different poses it would be tricky to say how easy it is to target them. Additionally the bases are not ideal for figures hugging the available cover.

I’d think no-one would create some uber-models which are all crouching/crawling, though I am sure I have heard of some doing this for 40k!? I think with all things when we play it should be in a spirit of the game (as it is only a game). I would personally leave things how there are. Inquisitor is a different matter as you have far few characters and can remember postures etc but I think we would struggle to remember/visualise for 2 gangs.

Author: snailracer [ 09 Jul 2012 04:07 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I just want a clear, concise, consistent set of rules for cover to remove the little niggly arguments.

The rules say ‘less than half the body can be seen’ is -2 to hit. If we go by the letter of that then I think we’re allowed to target fighters if just their finger is poking out!

It means that from the games at the weekend Chris couldn’t target my heavy because he could only see a tiny bit of his back pack, but Ju should have been able to fire through the wire fence as he could see Chris ganger (albeit massively obscured).

I would prefer the head&torso rule I mentioned above as pretty much all minis have the h&t in roughly the same position and its roughly the same size etc. I think its daft that a cool posed mini suffers because their hand is up in the air (as Chris ganger did when Ju’s heavy took him down because he could see his hand).

If we want to go with ‘if anypart of the mini can be seen he can be shot’ I’m perfectly happy but I just want it agreed on so there are no arguments in game.

As for the change of stance I think it would be fairly obvious/easy to remember, a set of counters would be pretty easy to make (just like the hiding/overwatch ones). You’d only need two extra minis; one crouching, one kneeling and then just swap them in when the min was being targeted. I’m pretty sure between us we’d have something suitable (guard?).

I’m not massively worried about the stance change bit, just thought it would be a nice addition, but I would really like the cover clarified. Maybe we could substitute in the 40k shooting/cover rules instead?

Author: The Power Spence [ 10 Jul 2012 10:16 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I’m not too fussed about the stance rule, but the rule about LOS to Torsos and/or Head is a must. I think GW really ruined 40k when they introduced “true LOS”. I think it would be sensible to go for Matt’s suggestion so that models can still be somewhat posable and dynamic.

Author: DOOM [ 11 Jul 2012 07:27 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Head and torso seems reasonable to me. Lets just keep it simple and easy.

Hopefully we can get a chance to play properly before the end of the year, at which point I’m looking forward to shotgunning the hell out of your puny gangs!

Author: BrizzleRob [ 12 Aug 2012 08:27 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

So full agreement on the head and torso LoS rule.

Author: snailracer [ 12 Jan 2013 05:18 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Found myself thinking about dreadball the other day and the using three dice for every roll mechanic.

Could we borrow it for necromunda? So cover is -1 dice or -2 dice etc

I don’t know how much this would change the odds etc I’m just throwing it out as an idea :)

Author: BrizzleRob [ 12 Jan 2013 05:43 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I think its a great suggestion!

It’s a mechanic I like, but essentially the game would have to be re-written to build it all in. Some care may be required , e.g. how many dice to hit does a certain weapon provide? There are various unofficial Mantic-ised rulesets for games like Mordheim, Warhammer Quest, MoW. This could be another. I like the idea of sci-fi gang combat which is fast and easy to play. The old game was great but we don’t have the time to labour through the ruleset almost from scratch every time we have a game.

Just thinking out loud there could be dice modifiers to hit (based on proportion of head and torso exposed) and the type of cover concealing the target.

An example might be an Orlock ganger shoots at a Goliath juve. The juve has flak armour (1D6 saving on 5+), and has just under half the head and torso behind cover (-1D6 to hit rolls) which is considered ‘hard’ (+2D6 save).

The ganger has an autogun (3D6 shots) which hit on 4+. The ganger has 3D6-1D6=2D6 to hit his target, rolling 4 and 5; both dice have successfully hit the target. To save the juve rolls 1D6+2D6=3D6 on which he has to make two successful saves to avoid taking damage. The juve rolls 2, 4, 6. Only one dice was successful so the juve has take one point of damage…which will probably equate to the single wound he has, so he is out of the game.

Then of course we can implement some other things such as exploding 6’s (roll another dice with each 6 rolled). Also the amount of damage taken could equate to the level of damage inflicted. Just enough damage to take all the target’s wounds take them out of the game, but is unlikely to result in very serious long-term injury. Inflict enough damage to double the target’s wounds in a single attack and the target is out and seriously injured…potentially dead.

Author: BrizzleRob [ 12 Jan 2013 06:32 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Humm…I’m probably getting ahead of myself. Just thinking how weapons could be put into classes for number of dice to hit.

Pistols 2D6
Assault Rifles 3D6
Support Weapon 6D6 (Heavy, Support)
Anti-Tank Weapon 3D6 (Heavy, Piercing)
Assault Weapon 6D6 (Heavy, Blast)

Most weapons have no range limits.
Blast weapons are limited in range. Some sort of template? Thinking of this being for weapons like flamers.
Shooting over 12″ -1D6.
Moving -1D6.
Support weapons can target models within 6″ of the primary target. Allocate dice to each model before rolling to hit.
Piercing weapons perform better against vehicles/buildings.

Within each class of weapon there are particular types which may provide improved levels of damage.

Autoguns give standard damage to the target.
Lasguns -1D6 to save dice.

Author: snailracer [ 13 Jan 2013 12:40 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I do like the idea. I think it could be a bit more simple.
I was thinking of it being more like the dreadball system so every action is a three dice roll that is then modified.

Moving would stay the same.

Each ganger has 3D6 shots (WS values in the rulebook may have to be changed)
Range Modifiers add or subtract dice (close range +1D6, long range -1D6 etc)
Partial cover -1D6
In cover -2D6
Appearing/disappearing target or charging target -1D6
Mover over 10″ -1D6
Small target -1D6
Large target +1D6

Weapons would add or subtract dice based on strength characteristic:
ST1 = -2D6
ST2 = -1D6
ST3 = +/-0D6
ST4 = +1D6
Sustained fire weapons are x2 to D6 after all modifiers (so Heavy [3D6] firing at partially covered target [-1D6] with heavy bolter [+2D6] would get 3-1+2 = 4D6 x2 for sustained = 8D6)

Template weapons do as many damage as their ST value. Possibly -D6 values for the toughness roll depending on weapon

Ammo rolls: Every 1 rolled is put aside and rolled again. Failure again means out of ammo. Ammo roll values may need changing.

Take wounds
Each ganger has 3D6 for toughness. Each successful roll removes a successful hit.
Armour adds D6 depending on armour (flak +1D6, Carapace +2D6)
Any successful hits not removed do damage. 1 point per D6. Take wounds off character profile. Roll for injury as per the rulebook. Flesh wound causes -1D6

Hand to Hand
Work it just like dreadball blocking….
Each ganger gets 3D6
+1D6 charging, Higher up, opponent fumbles (you take their dice), critical hit(exploding sixes)
-1D6 Encumbered, obstacle

Clear winner: Ganger with most hits causes number of hits equal to the difference between gangers and loser rolls toughness
Both gangers score the number of hits and have to roll toughness

Modifiers similar to shooting modifiers

If every roll is just 4+ to pass it should make it a bit quicker. Some gangs could have different stats to represent better at combat or shooting.

It would be interesting to play it like this and see what happens

Author: BrizzleRob [ 13 Jan 2013 10:44 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Yep. I do wonder if there is an opportunity to reduce the number of rolls made (ie. cut out strength/toughness rolls to wound).

Author: snailracer [ 13 Jan 2013 05:16 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Yep. I think what I have described above cuts out some rolls. Essentially shooter rolls three dice plus or minus for range weapon and cover and target rolls three dice plus for armour.

Cc is essentially the same.

When is anyone around to try this out?

Author: Tubes [ 13 Jan 2013 07:02 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I’m back in Lym next weekend but I am looking after my dad before and after a day surgical appointment on Sat.

All the above looks interesting. The best bet would be to test some scenarios (maybe write it down yourself to check approx percentages) then those tweaked/analysed rules can be tried with a game.

Funnily enough I am nearly at a point to spray a base coat of paint onto the final (I hope) batch of elevated necromunda terrain… Hopefully we can have some games in a month or so on the painted terrain.

Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC – 1 hour [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group


House Rules
Page 2 of 3

Author: DOOM [ 14 Jan 2013 07:15 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

What you have outlined above is very similar to project pandora. But, where PP is quick and fast flowing, it lacks any sort of variation. The 2nd ed 40k rules work well for necromunda because they have an almost RPG level of detail, which accommodates the vast amount of variation present in the game. So, I would fear that trying to translate necromunda into a system like this might not work well, unless you generalise guns, thus removing a lot of the diversity.

And is necromunda such a slow game that it needs speeding up?

I think, when you guys see PP you’ll really like it, but you’ll see that it’s a completely different style of game. It lacks the personalisation of necromunda. That isn’t to say rules like this woiuldn’t suit Necromunda, but they’d need a lot of work and it would be better to work from the ground up.

Author: snailracer [ 14 Jan 2013 07:15 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

You’re probably right. I think there may be quite a few clashes with the existing mechanic once you get into the more complicated bits.

Sounds like we need to meld the two together. Is project pandora available free anywhere?

Author: snailracer [ 14 Jan 2013 07:20 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

$5 on wargames vault is the cheapest i can find. Couldnt find a free one

Author: Tubes [ 14 Jan 2013 07:54 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I doubt it is free as it is a stand alone boardgame at the moment (unlike KoW and WP which are systems where they can get a return from you buying the models)… But from what I understand the mechanics are simple enough that you may find some gems on the forums?

Author: BrizzleRob [ 14 Jan 2013 09:41 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I suppose it depends what you want. Given we play so very infrequently I like games which are simple-ish and quick to play. It potentially enables us to play a few games.

Certainly over-simplification loses some of the detail which may have been of particular interest. I’d like to think there could be something here. I’d suggests weapons provide certain characteristics; weapon class number of dice to hit (common across class), modifiers to number of hit dice (weapon specific), modifiers to number of saving dice (weapon specific).

A character’s stat line defines the scores required for successful results. These may be modified with specialist kit (eg. Scopes/sights).

Author: snailracer [ 15 Jan 2013 07:20 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I downloaded this little odds calculator

4+ on 3 dice is surprisingly easy. I think the stand out thing from necro is the poor ability to hit but the deadliness once you are hit, and CC being brutal.

I’ll have a read of PP later and see how it works

I’d still be interested to just try necro with our bolt on suggestions and see how it plays

Author: snailracer [ 19 Jan 2013 06:53 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

i’ve had a read of PP and rolled a few dice. PP is a more simple game. Probably more simple than dreadball.

I think the sheer complexity of necromunda makes the system unusable. With Dreadball there are only a few modifiers that can be applied which keeps the dice rolling simple. If used with necro some of the combinations of modifiers would see you rolling lots of dice where before just the one would have worked.

As DOOM said its a nice idea for a system written from the ground up but probably wont work to just bolt it onto the existing.

What are the legalities of using a 3 dice system(or any dice system) for your own game? How far do a companies rights go over ownership of rolling dice?

Author: BrizzleRob [ 20 Jan 2013 11:04 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

The cynic in me thinks GW would have tried to patent the D6 rolling mechanism if it were possible. A game for our own purposes shouldn’t be a problem, and plenty of games draw inspiration from others. Perhaps a unique 2D6 standard roll would be the way forward, reflecting the difficulty of gang fighting.

I firmly believe an accessible and low faff gang game would be awesome. Standard dice quantities which are modified, with success based on satisfying a stat value or beating the number of opponent successes. Do away with maximum ranges. Shooting over a range of X becomes challenging, and there is a short measurement stick to check this.

Less time measuring. Less time modifying individual dice values. More time moving models around! More flow, more action, more cinematic experience!

Author: snailracer [ 20 Jan 2013 11:43 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

You’ve got mail!

Author: BrizzleRob [ 24 Jan 2013 01:11 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Thanks. Unfortunately I haven’t found the time to properly read your draft yet.

I could be a broken record, but I like the idea of doing away with maximum ranges. Have one (two?) intermediate ranges where shooting over gets progressively harder (-1D6). An experienced ganger can’t shoot effectively over long range (modifiers reduce hit dice to zero), whereas someone more skilled/experienced might have a chance (1D6?).

Author: snailracer [ 25 Jan 2013 06:25 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I’ve gone for three ranges, with the furthest being 24 – infinity inches, but restricted some weapons to only being able to fire at certain ranges. I think you hit problems not restricting some weapons as the effective range of a pistol is less than a rifle no matter how good a marksman you are.

I also tried to avoid negative modifiers as I think it makes it a bit clunkier somehow. I think its nicer and cleaner if you only have to add modifiers.

Hopefully you’ve had a read of my witterings and can see what i’m on about :)

Author: DOOM [ 28 Jan 2013 08:55 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I’m sorry I’ve not got back to you properly with my feedback, I liked what I saw though! I’m in quite a bit of discomfort atm so can’t really use a computer for very long.

I think you’ll have to have some negatives, particularly with SMGs and machine pistols, which would gives pluses at short range, but then should give no modifier or negatives from medium onwards.

anyway, talk soon.

Author: snailracer [ 28 Jan 2013 06:39 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I’ve used negative modifiers in the weapon range tables but each weapon should still only give a result that adds to your shooting ability (even if it is +0). So a machine gun does 1 damage with +2 at short range, +1 at medium, and -1 at long, giving; +3 at short, +2 at medium, and +0 at long. Obviously these numbers need playtesting etc and it’ll probably all change

Author: Tubes [ 29 Jan 2013 05:53 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I’ve just had a quick glance over Matt’s, and Rob’s tweaked summary sheet. It does look good in a very simplified, fairly quick way. Rob’s sheet appears very clear and easy to understand.

I’m hoping to finish off some Necromunda terrain later this week (but will need painting etc), so would be interesting to trial sometime. However in the meantime I would advocate test by yourself with proxy models (or even paper) to gauge in practice whether the dice/modifiers are reasonable. Then we can step up to terrain, models with actual cover to utilise etc to fine tune…

Author: snailracer [ 30 Jan 2013 07:21 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Robs idea is definitely more simple than what I outlined. I think both could work well.

The only problem with testing by yourself is that you rarely try and break what you have written (intentionally or unintentionally) so the problems don’t really appear sat rolling dice on your own. Most of the rolls and modifiers seem reasonable sat here rolling dice (and using the odds calculator and comparing across to the Necromunda rulebook) but the real world (and Pete playing it :) ) is a different story

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC – 1 hour [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group


House Rules
Page 3 of 3

Author: Tubes [ 27 Apr 2013 05:46 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I’d thought I’d mention that Mantic are now producing Deadzone. A sci-fi mini wargame, but plays like a (simplified) boardgame… with (great) terrain & gang/faction progression.

Could be a credible, quick, simple, easy alternative…


Author: snailracer [ 04 Feb 2016 08:54 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Have been looking at skirmish systems and came across infinitythegame that has this los rule http://wiki.infinitythegame.com/en/Volu … _Templates

Author: Tubes [ 05 Feb 2016 06:46 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Yup, it seems good in principle but it’s yet another template to place next to the model… But you need to make sure it’s aligned properly to the base (unless it has a hand piece which acts as a jig against the model’s base?) etc. You might as well be playing with cylinders. Unless a game is very simplified, targeting and cover could always be a controversial issue

Author: BrizzleRob [ 06 Feb 2016 09:54 am ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

I’ve briefly looked at Infinity in the past, and I recall Mercs has a similar template system. I quite like the ideas of templates like this; and they need only be used if a shot is vaguely contentious. I consider them pragmatic solutions to real gaming heartache.

Author: snailracer [ 09 Feb 2016 07:03 pm ]
Post subject: Re: House Rules

Nearly all miniature games can be reduced to playing with templates (x wing is just moving squares around!)At least with a cylinder rule you can have really dynamic models without worrying that the cool pose will get you killed.

It would be no different to every miniature being posed with arms by their sides…

Page 3 of 3 All times are UTC – 1 hour [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group