The throwing knives has wrong profile. It always has wrong profile. For every damn hired gun. This time Jorth Slither gets the honor.
N18 Collected Errors/Typos in the Book of Ruin
- Thread starter TopsyKretts
- Start date
Pages 43, 44 and 45 have different Extra Arm Special Rules. The Alpha has a newer wording, while the wording for Acolytes and Neophytes was copied from PDF.
When does it stop?!
When does it stop?!
To say something positive about GW's work: I think that house favour tables are really good. They offer a lot of flavour and are a nice arbitrator tool to help out weaker gangs. I especially like the Eye of the Gods for cool factor (although crunch wise it is the weakest out of all).
Eye of the Gods is trash-tier, of course, since regular gangs get a free ganger with XP and 150 creds worth of gear on this roll and both Outlaws and GSC-gangs get at least something useful (granted, a Genestealer with 6" move, no ranged attacks and no Infiltrate IS useless for just one turn, but he could cause some real trouble if he sticks for two or three turns).
But if we're talking positive for a change (a much needed change, when we're talking about GW, mind you) - the new scenarios all seem reasonable and not outright broken. I savvy some can be tons of fun, especially the Multiplayer ones. Of course there'll be a need for some tweaks, but in general they are on a different level compared to most s**t that we got before.
I'd also like to note that they all have both players choosing two cards to begin with, with extra cards being random. Provided you ban the broken cards (History of Violence, Unstable Footing, Click, Curse of the machine spirit and all that give extra activations or actions if you ask me) this system might be on par with the common Take x+3, keep x houserule that quite a lot of people are using.
They can hire Outlaw Brute(s)? When Outlawed, they lose access to hire their House's Brutes. They can also hire Outlaw hangers-on?
There's some confusion as to whether Outlaw gangs can hire neutral non-outlaw brutes, namely Ambots and Ogryns.
I don't see why not. Ambots and Ogryn are pretty much controlled by whoever owns/programs them. Their opinions are null.
There is a subtle difference in the Outlaw rules presented here compared to the Law and Misrule campaign, but I think it is intentional.
In L&M , Law Abiding gangs could not turn other Law Abiding captives in to the Guilders, only Outlaws. In this there is no such restriction, meaning if playing Dominion you follow the usual capture rules with these slight adjustments; namely, full value for Outlaws fighters sold and half value for Law Abiding fighters sold. I like the idea that there is always a Guilder who's like: "well he ain't an outlaw... but I'll give you 40 credits. Looks like a fine factory serf/mine worker!"
This appears to have been done to alow these Outlaw rules to work in any campaign type, it even mentions that a campaign will change or add to these rules. A good call to make them generally available.
Edit: also, working from memory here, but if I recall correctly these rules do not force Alliance tests when changing alignment, while it dose in L&M. Also the Rep loss for changing alignments in L&M is not present here, as it is in a later section of those rules which are the L&M specific benefits for Rep and alignment.
In L&M , Law Abiding gangs could not turn other Law Abiding captives in to the Guilders, only Outlaws. In this there is no such restriction, meaning if playing Dominion you follow the usual capture rules with these slight adjustments; namely, full value for Outlaws fighters sold and half value for Law Abiding fighters sold. I like the idea that there is always a Guilder who's like: "well he ain't an outlaw... but I'll give you 40 credits. Looks like a fine factory serf/mine worker!"
This appears to have been done to alow these Outlaw rules to work in any campaign type, it even mentions that a campaign will change or add to these rules. A good call to make them generally available.
Edit: also, working from memory here, but if I recall correctly these rules do not force Alliance tests when changing alignment, while it dose in L&M. Also the Rep loss for changing alignments in L&M is not present here, as it is in a later section of those rules which are the L&M specific benefits for Rep and alignment.
Last edited:
@TopsyKretts
Some things I've noticed that have not been added to the OP yet:
Internal inconsistencies:
The version of Assail found on page 99 (copied from The Book of Judgement p117 or 124) is different from the one found on pages 34, 48 and 79 (copied from The Book of Judgement p25)
External inconsistencies:
The version of Flame Blast found on page 99 is technically different from the one found in The Book of Judgement on page 117 (says 'weapon with the Melee trait' instead of 'close combat weapon', but may count as a clarification) and completely different from the one found in The Book of Judgement on page 124 (says 'ranged weapon'). This could be intentional as the fighters are carrying different weapons, but still...
The version of Freeze Time found on page 99 is different from the one found in The Book of Judgement on page 117. It now applies 'during the following round' instead of 'for the remainder of this round' and its range has been reduced to 6" (instead of 12").
Of note, there is a reference in the Book of ruin to the powers from the N18 rulebook (those from the Ghast Harvest scenario, on page 171), that use the same wording as the Book of Judgement. So it may technically count as an internal inconsistency.
Errors:
Both Chaos cults and Genestealer cults have to pay 65 credits to purchase Demolition charges from their respective Equipment Lists while they only cost 50 credits in the trading post. This error has been copy/pasted from the pdf (demo charge were 50 credits for Genestealer Cults in the original WD article).
Some things I've noticed that have not been added to the OP yet:
Internal inconsistencies:
The version of Assail found on page 99 (copied from The Book of Judgement p117 or 124) is different from the one found on pages 34, 48 and 79 (copied from The Book of Judgement p25)
External inconsistencies:
The version of Flame Blast found on page 99 is technically different from the one found in The Book of Judgement on page 117 (says 'weapon with the Melee trait' instead of 'close combat weapon', but may count as a clarification) and completely different from the one found in The Book of Judgement on page 124 (says 'ranged weapon'). This could be intentional as the fighters are carrying different weapons, but still...
The version of Freeze Time found on page 99 is different from the one found in The Book of Judgement on page 117. It now applies 'during the following round' instead of 'for the remainder of this round' and its range has been reduced to 6" (instead of 12").
Of note, there is a reference in the Book of ruin to the powers from the N18 rulebook (those from the Ghast Harvest scenario, on page 171), that use the same wording as the Book of Judgement. So it may technically count as an internal inconsistency.
Errors:
Both Chaos cults and Genestealer cults have to pay 65 credits to purchase Demolition charges from their respective Equipment Lists while they only cost 50 credits in the trading post. This error has been copy/pasted from the pdf (demo charge were 50 credits for Genestealer Cults in the original WD article).
Strange wording in some scenarios!
12 Houseless Gangers total? Or each? 24 total? What's up with that deployment rule, 12" away from an edge OR within 3" of another fighter?
What is a battlefield object?
I much prefer the "Ending the battle" wording in this book:
Makes it much more compatible if you want to modify them for multi-player. Earlier publications often used this wording (less optimal wording):
Always strange that they specified that the game ends at the end of a round. When I play with friends, the game ends "when it ends", we never remember to keep playing until a certain phase (after a gang is no longer on the table).
It's funny how they change small things like between books. Another part they started with at some time which I really enjoy:
This is a much better solution, than the default of counting any fighters removed from the battlefield as Out of Action. Kind of silly to increase chance of bottle because your gang is successfully accomplishing an escape (or similar).
The players should select 12 fighter models to represent Houseless Gangers (see page 65). After both crews have deployed, players take turns, starting with the player who has priority, placing these models anywhere on the battlefield more than 12" from an edge or within 3" of another fighter.
Page 64, Propaganda scenario.
12 Houseless Gangers total? Or each? 24 total? What's up with that deployment rule, 12" away from an edge OR within 3" of another fighter?
Loot objects must be at least 6" from a board edge, and at least 3" from a battlefield object.
Page 66, Scavenge scenario.
What is a battlefield object?
I much prefer the "Ending the battle" wording in this book:
The battle ends when only one gang has fighters remaining on the battlefield.
Makes it much more compatible if you want to modify them for multi-player. Earlier publications often used this wording (less optimal wording):
If either player has no fighters on the board at the end of a round, the game ends.
Always strange that they specified that the game ends at the end of a round. When I play with friends, the game ends "when it ends", we never remember to keep playing until a certain phase (after a gang is no longer on the table).
It's funny how they change small things like between books. Another part they started with at some time which I really enjoy:
Fighters removed in this way do not count as having been taken Out of Action, though do not count for Bottle tests.
This is a much better solution, than the default of counting any fighters removed from the battlefield as Out of Action. Kind of silly to increase chance of bottle because your gang is successfully accomplishing an escape (or similar).
The select 12 fighter models reads to me as 12 in total. But both players pick and agree the models (quite important due to the weapons they carry being wysywig and therefore open for a bit of "gamesmanship"
No idea what a battle field object is, need to look through the books to check this hasn't slipped in anywhere as a definition.
I also read it as 12 Houseless fighters total, and the brown box states that players should agree on the weapons and wargear they carry (or the models used, as it's supposed to be WYSIWYG for weapons). Strangely, I think a Van Saar player may insist on everyone carrying rad guns and that asking opponents to agree on anything is a recipe for disaster, but whatever...
I think they should be deployed "12" away from any edge and 3" away from any fighter" (or "not within 12" of an edge or within 3" of any fighter"). It looks like the forgot mid sentence how they chose to phrase it.
I think they should be deployed "12" away from any edge and 3" away from any fighter" (or "not within 12" of an edge or within 3" of any fighter"). It looks like the forgot mid sentence how they chose to phrase it.
"Battlefield objects" are mentioned in the rulebook (page 49) and are 'defined' as "terrain features, objectives and so forth"
Well, after reading BoJ and paying attention this time it's clear, that Outlaw gangs can't hire non-Outlaw Brutes or Hangers-on. It specifically states that on page 38. 
Similar threads
