N18 Book of Judgement discsussion

Baffo

Gang Champion
Aug 2, 2018
385
862
118
Ljubljana
The void born scum look interesting, strength and toughness 5 armed with
Autopistol/laspistol and knife and two in a shore party. Are these meant to be Ogryns?
The general consensus is that their stat line is most likely a typo (maybe just mistakenly swapped with the Bosun's statline). The only other entourage with an Ogre statted bodyguard is the Water Guild's Syphoning delegation and they get only 1 such brute, so it make little sense for this other entourage to get 2 Ogre-statted grunts, especially for them to be armed with tiny knife and laspistols?
 

Chitriel

Ganger
Dec 11, 2017
175
228
48
Denmark
I think the general consensus is that the Bosun and the Void Born Scum have had their profiles switched around.

Two of the listed statlines in a shore party seem rather overpowered, and fluffwise Void Born are almost exclusively described as physically very weak (an effect of being born and growing up in low gravity).

Edit: Totally ninjaed by @Baffo
 

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
3,141
2,985
173
Norway
Talking about odd, check out the Threadneedle:

Threadneedle worms can only be used once, after which they are removed from the fighter's card. When Threadneedle worms are used, roll a D6 on the Threadneedle table. The worms are then used and removed from the gang's stash.​
1 - The Worms Turn​
3-4 - A Few Live Worms​
4-5 - A Few More Live Worms​
6 - A Can Full of Worms​
That level of quality!!! On a sidenote, that result 6 (A Can Full of Worms) is truly something. Roll an Injury dice for all enemy fighters on the battlefield! Luckily it treats Out of Action as Seriously Injured, but still looks like one of the most devastating effects in this game so far?
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Thorgor

Thorgor

Of The YAQ
Oct 12, 2015
3,993
9,098
138
35
Sevres 92130 France
So... the enforcer gang rules say that all the fighters can have multiple fighter cards... im i right? gangers with multiple cards?
Yes, this is also how I read them. I guess it's a roundabout way to let you drop the starting stub gun without letting you drop the starting stub gun (though it's unclear whether you can "destroy" the original stub gun card or if you are stuck with it for random selection games)

3-4 - A Few Live Worms
4-5 - A Few More Live Worms
I had to read that a few times before my brain stopped auto-correcting :LOL:
Well, obviously nothing happens when you roll a 2 and you get both results on a 4. Because RAW! :p
As a side note, the 4-5 result assumes players have three 5" Blast markers laying around, which doesn't seem very practical.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: TopsyKretts

Merzbau

Gang Champion
Nov 9, 2018
269
358
68
Philadelphia
Still trying to iron out how to have one of our players use Enforcers in a Dominion campaign here as the "Enforcers in Dominion campaigns" page is incredibly sloppily written.

1. No boons, period, seems like an obvious mistake that should be no non-income boons. Enforcers gain income from Rackets normally in a Crime & Misrule campaign *and* gain much higher bounties than they would for captives in a Dominion campaign (and have easier access to Bounty Hunters to make the actual capture itself even easier), so to have one campaign type starve them for cash with no justification given is bizarre.
2. Upon several rereadings it seems like "policing" a territory is analogous to occupying it and that the emphasis in "Enforcers cannot occupy and control territories like other gangs can" should be more on "like other gangs" than "cannot"- for example, the bonus rep "after every successful defense of the territory" is literally meaningless if they abandon it after policing it.
3. Challenges are a total botch as written. Following on from 2, it reads like any challenge to the Enforcers somehow represents an assault on their Precinct- this almost feels like two mutually exclusive sets of rules (one where policing involves sticking around to defend a territory, one where all fights are conducted at the Precinct and there's no constant police presence elsewhere) were badly integrated

Here's what I've been leaning toward as a resolution for our campaign, which is continuing with Dominion before gradually introducing the necessary elements to layer Crime & Misrule over it:
1. Enforcers gain income normally from Territories, but in lieu of any non-income boons, gain the bonus rep for successfully defending their territories.
2. Challenges for policed territories are handled normally.
3. Attacks against the Precinct itself are Zone Mortalis games with tiles placed entirely by the defending Enforcer player according to the scenario, which is determined using the usual table.
4. This is entirely a house rule, not anything informed by the "Enforcers in Dominion" page, and meant to make the unique Zone Mortalis rules come into play more often as Precinct attacks will likely be rare- Rescue Missions to free captives taken by the Enforcers will also be Zone Mortalis games in the Precinct.

How are other campaigns dealing with this rule set? Does this seem like a fair reading of the situation?
 

icekarim

Juve
Apr 12, 2018
45
112
43
Canada
merzbau, I like where you are going with this. When I first read the enforcers rules for dominion your house rules is how I interpreted it, with the enforcers still collecting income. Looking at it again, RAW they are crippled compared to other gangs as things go on.
 

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
3,141
2,985
173
Norway
Am I missing something, or is there no test to see if the Crimial Alliances will join the battle? They join automatically?
 

Jacob Dryearth

Gang Hero
Sep 6, 2016
928
1,102
103
It seems like that is one of the benefits of being an Outlaw. Also Guild Bond Rackets allow you to ignore the test to see if they join a battle as well, and they are available to both Law Abiding and Outlaw gangs.

I'm tempted to house rule that Law Abiding gangs to form Criminal Alliances as well, but they add 1d6 to the alignment shift roll after each game, or 2d6 if they used the free fighters. The text supports these type of alliances, not to mention the Imperial Impostor's abilities.
 

Jacob Dryearth

Gang Hero
Sep 6, 2016
928
1,102
103
Still trying to iron out how to have one of our players use Enforcers in a Dominion campaign here as the "Enforcers in Dominion campaigns" page is incredibly sloppily written.

1. No boons, period, seems like an obvious mistake that should be no non-income boons. Enforcers gain income from Rackets normally in a Crime & Misrule campaign *and* gain much higher bounties than they would for captives in a Dominion campaign (and have easier access to Bounty Hunters to make the actual capture itself even easier), so to have one campaign type starve them for cash with no justification given is bizarre.
2. Upon several rereadings it seems like "policing" a territory is analogous to occupying it and that the emphasis in "Enforcers cannot occupy and control territories like other gangs can" should be more on "like other gangs" than "cannot"- for example, the bonus rep "after every successful defense of the territory" is literally meaningless if they abandon it after policing it.
3. Challenges are a total botch as written. Following on from 2, it reads like any challenge to the Enforcers somehow represents an assault on their Precinct- this almost feels like two mutually exclusive sets of rules (one where policing involves sticking around to defend a territory, one where all fights are conducted at the Precinct and there's no constant police presence elsewhere) were badly integrated

Here's what I've been leaning toward as a resolution for our campaign, which is continuing with Dominion before gradually introducing the necessary elements to layer Crime & Misrule over it:
1. Enforcers gain income normally from Territories, but in lieu of any non-income boons, gain the bonus rep for successfully defending their territories.
2. Challenges for policed territories are handled normally.
3. Attacks against the Precinct itself are Zone Mortalis games with tiles placed entirely by the defending Enforcer player according to the scenario, which is determined using the usual table.
4. This is entirely a house rule, not anything informed by the "Enforcers in Dominion" page, and meant to make the unique Zone Mortalis rules come into play more often as Precinct attacks will likely be rare- Rescue Missions to free captives taken by the Enforcers will also be Zone Mortalis games in the Precinct.

How are other campaigns dealing with this rule set? Does this seem like a fair reading of the situation?
That's a logical fix for Dominion Campaigns. I am combining the two campaigns, and only using the Dominion part of the rules for Territories, while using Law and Misrule for Rackets.

As a side note: Venators in a L&M campaign collect bounties on everyone, Outlaw and Law Abiding. I suggest ignoring the Claiming Bounty section for Vanators and using L&M bounties as written, with an additional bonus of D3+1 rep for each bounty taken alive, much like Enforcers can get extra rep for policing.
 

spafe

Executive Officer in charge of Hats
Staff member
Necromunda Custodian
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Tribe Council
Feb 8, 2013
10,034
13,519
283
Tilehurst, U.k.
Manacles... what are they for? why would it be better to 'lock in' a enemy fighter rather than hitting them? It still counts as an attack, so you will get retalation attacks against you, even if it is successful (although harder to hit for sure). A slightly higher chance to capture... seems to be the only benefit...
 

el_guestos

Ganger
Aug 2, 2018
199
119
43
Leeds, England, UK
I wash thinking if you go up against a brute or a fighter that’s inherently better than you in close combat, seems like a good way for a nimble Escher to even the odds against a renderizer wielding heavily armored Goliath, especially if she’s got a few parries
 
  • Like
Reactions: TopsyKretts

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
3,141
2,985
173
Norway
With manacles and that new skill, you could potentially have +2 modifier to capture roll? It's a niche item for those who have high priority to capture some one. Sounds like Enforcers to me.

Edit: No effect on capture.

If you start the activation already Engaged, you often have an action to spare anyway, so why not use it on magnacles?
 
Last edited:

Thorgor

Of The YAQ
Oct 12, 2015
3,993
9,098
138
35
Sevres 92130 France
Manacles... what are they for? why would it be better to 'lock in' a enemy fighter rather than hitting them? It still counts as an attack, so you will get retalation attacks against you, even if it is successful (although harder to hit for sure). A slightly higher chance to capture... seems to be the only benefit...
It seems made for fighters with poor CC stats, as it doesn't use any of the user's stat, only the targets' initiative.
Maybe it's made for high Movement/high Initiative juves? Charge the big guys with low initiative, tie them up then disengage and repeat? It still seems risky though, as the juve will have to survive at least one reaction attack (it's kinda strange that magnacles don't count as disarming the target btw).

If you start the activation already Engaged, you often have an action to spare anyway, so why not use it on magnacles?
Because they use up your Attack (Basic) action.
 
  • Like
Reactions: el_guestos

Thorgor

Of The YAQ
Oct 12, 2015
3,993
9,098
138
35
Sevres 92130 France
I thought that was the Fight (Basic) action? I don't remember seeing the Attack (Basic) action before, looks to be unique for Magnacles.
Ah, yes, you're correct.
I'm guessing they meant 'Fight' because 'Attack' seems very generic for something that is only used for Magnacles.
What's one more typo at this point?
 

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
3,141
2,985
173
Norway
Hey, if they messed up the Magnacles in such a way that it is useless, why not also take Attack as a new unique separate action? Maybe those two mistakes can balance each other out, making Magnacles viable? This would at least be strictly RAW?