Maybe they forgot they made the BZ-D7 PDF and just copied the text from N17?
N18 Collected Errors/Typos in the N21 Rulebook (Hive War)
- Thread starter TopsyKretts
- Start date
Yes, this. Probably should add that to YCE notes next time we get to it...
1" again? That's disappointing.
Other than the change of when fleeing gangers take their Cool checks, I'm completely ignoring this book. Honestly I think fleeing should have always been in the End phase, the only functional change is that you will no longer know who has Priority before deciding to voluntarily flee.
Other than the change of when fleeing gangers take their Cool checks, I'm completely ignoring this book. Honestly I think fleeing should have always been in the End phase, the only functional change is that you will no longer know who has Priority before deciding to voluntarily flee.
Last edited:
What is the actual wording of Pitch Black?
Melee gangs should need to buy equipment just like shooting gangs to get around the Pitch Black rules. Being able to charge from more than 3" away in darkness sways thing even more towards melee gangs under those conditions, at which they already excel.
What's the sentry change, pinned sentries raise the alarm? I thought that was already the case, everyone I've played with do it that way already.
Melee gangs should need to buy equipment just like shooting gangs to get around the Pitch Black rules. Being able to charge from more than 3" away in darkness sways thing even more towards melee gangs under those conditions, at which they already excel.
What's the sentry change, pinned sentries raise the alarm? I thought that was already the case, everyone I've played with do it that way already.
I would rather say it is opposite. Pitch Black is a nightmare for melee. You need to walk/run within 3" of an enemy, then wait and hope the enemy doesn't do anything for the entire round (until your fighter's next activation):
- Walk away (outside 3").
- Shoot (you put yourself in the vulnerable within 3").
- Charge first (again, you sacrificed your own fighter by putting it within 3").
Pinned sentries spot the attacker. There were no such wording before?
Last edited:
Well actually, now that I think about it, you can charge from out of sight, which isn't much different than charging in pitch black.
I also dont understand why one can easily do a double move (even triple move with sprint), basically run at full speed, but not charge. (in pitch black)
Last edited:
I cant see this mentioned above (apologies if I’ve missed it), but has Hive War also updated the ‘Raising the Alarm’ part of the Sneak Attack Rules (and defined a ‘sentry round’), as well as the spotting attackers from being pinned rule?
NECROMUNDA RULEBOOK:
- Intro: “In these scenarios, the following rules are used”
- Raising the Alarm: “Once the alarm is raised, the sentries rules are no longer used and the defender’s fighters follow all the normal rules.”
DARK UPRISING RULEBOOK:
- Intro: “In these scenarios, the following rules are used”
- Raising the Alarm: “Once the alarm is raised, all sentries immediately gain Ready markers, the Sentries rules are no longer used, and the defender’s fighters follow all the normal rules.”
HIVE WAR:
- Intro: “In these scenarios, the following rules are used. This is called the ‘Sentry Round’”
- Raising the Alarm: “Once the alarm is raised, the Sentry Round ends and play progresses to the End phase. Once this is complete, the battle continues as normal.”
I think, overall this is a sensible improvement:
- original rules favoured attacker (alarm raised, but no way for defenders fighters to get ready markers until next round, so attacker could set up ready for a Turkey shoot)
- dark uprising rules (potentially) favoured defender as raising alarm at wrong moment could mean the attacker suddenly faced a full defender gang activating when they had no ready fighters.
- hive war rules mean alarm is raised, and everything resets to the start of a new round, with all fighters having ready markers.
NECROMUNDA RULEBOOK:
- Intro: “In these scenarios, the following rules are used”
- Raising the Alarm: “Once the alarm is raised, the sentries rules are no longer used and the defender’s fighters follow all the normal rules.”
DARK UPRISING RULEBOOK:
- Intro: “In these scenarios, the following rules are used”
- Raising the Alarm: “Once the alarm is raised, all sentries immediately gain Ready markers, the Sentries rules are no longer used, and the defender’s fighters follow all the normal rules.”
HIVE WAR:
- Intro: “In these scenarios, the following rules are used. This is called the ‘Sentry Round’”
- Raising the Alarm: “Once the alarm is raised, the Sentry Round ends and play progresses to the End phase. Once this is complete, the battle continues as normal.”
I think, overall this is a sensible improvement:
- original rules favoured attacker (alarm raised, but no way for defenders fighters to get ready markers until next round, so attacker could set up ready for a Turkey shoot)
- dark uprising rules (potentially) favoured defender as raising alarm at wrong moment could mean the attacker suddenly faced a full defender gang activating when they had no ready fighters.
- hive war rules mean alarm is raised, and everything resets to the start of a new round, with all fighters having ready markers.
The thread about the validity of the rules from Hive WAr is older - from Jun 7 - but I think Hive War is a special starter box for beginners. I understand it to mean that the Hive War rulebook was created and specially adapted for this.
As long as there is no new official Necromunda FAQ, I would therefore only use the rules from Hive War in Hive War games.
As long as there is no new official Necromunda FAQ, I would therefore only use the rules from Hive War in Hive War games.
Can’t see that thread. Not sure I agree with only using rules in hive war games; up to arbitrator obviously; but most of the core rules are clearly updates core rules from main rules in N18/Dark Uprising. The problem of course is who has the hive war rulebook, and how you avoid people using or expecting different rule sets.
Yes, scenarios and gang selection very much streamlined versions for a starter box.
But the updated parts of the core rules look very much like updated/faq’d core rules - e.g. change to when you test for fighters to flee after bottling updates those rules to reflect what the ‘House of…’ books seem to be using anyway.
Why they havent republished an FAQ reflecting these changes is beyond me… but perhaps that is the purpose of the new ‘rules editor’ post GW recently advertised, and we’ll see it once that post is filled and the new role established.
(note - just replying to above, dont want to derail this thread, but helpful if could point to previous thread on validity of rules s couldn’t find it from browsing forum).
Excuse, my mistake, it should have been called post instead of thread. It's here on page 1.
Exactly what you are talking about, I had in mind. The irritation when you no longer know exactly which rules should apply. The extra work of checking every single rule in Hive War for novelty and adoption when in doubt. Who decides and other things. And I don't want to be forced to buy a book (and game box) because of a few small changes that we otherwise don't actually need (for the main game).
In view of these things, I then come to a weighing up and the question of what is important to me and what do I want. For example togetherness and simplicity. - I don't have to go through everything and then it can sometimes be easier to overlook something and leave it out. Especially if not everyone has it or not everyone wants to buy it.
Or you can alternatively use a handy compilation.
Provided that it is easy accessible to everyone, then all have a common source again that is easy to communicate about.
Exactly what you are talking about, I had in mind. The irritation when you no longer know exactly which rules should apply. The extra work of checking every single rule in Hive War for novelty and adoption when in doubt. Who decides and other things. And I don't want to be forced to buy a book (and game box) because of a few small changes that we otherwise don't actually need (for the main game).
In view of these things, I then come to a weighing up and the question of what is important to me and what do I want. For example togetherness and simplicity. - I don't have to go through everything and then it can sometimes be easier to overlook something and leave it out. Especially if not everyone has it or not everyone wants to buy it.
Or you can alternatively use a handy compilation.
Provided that it is easy accessible to everyone, then all have a common source again that is easy to communicate about.
Last edited:
The problem arises when people play with different rules from different years of this current ruleset.
This is the inherent problem with a paid for physical rolling ruleset. There’s also the issue of what happens when people own a ruleset which is OOP but want to play in a group which has just brought in to the current iteration.
Basically it’s an unfriendly practice that they’ve instigated here.
Ideally an arbitrator would determine which common rules are to be used at the beginning of a campaign; though even that is problematic when people have paid real world currency for their books. We already saw this when the “House of” books were introduced.
This is the inherent problem with a paid for physical rolling ruleset. There’s also the issue of what happens when people own a ruleset which is OOP but want to play in a group which has just brought in to the current iteration.
Basically it’s an unfriendly practice that they’ve instigated here.
Ideally an arbitrator would determine which common rules are to be used at the beginning of a campaign; though even that is problematic when people have paid real world currency for their books. We already saw this when the “House of” books were introduced.
This is particularly one of the main tasks I am spending some time to solve. Having one single unified ruleset. It is having a surge of popularity lately. And in order to get things right, I'm very happy for the detailed discussions here and other places at Yaktribe 
This is particularly one of the main tasks I am spending some time to solve. Having one single unified ruleset. It is having a surge of popularity lately. And in order to get things right, I'm very happy for the detailed discussions here and other places at Yaktribe
I agree. These threads are the best because most campaigns that I try to run are basically stated as “refer to the hard cover rulebook with the following changes…” and I can usually just copy and paste the changes listed in the first post.
If I hit anything extra during the campaign I just right it down and run a campaign long FAQ document and then adjust the rules in the next campaign.
Loot caskets, slight additional tweak. As well as the already noted removal of credits (because they aren't used), it also adds the new text below, clarifying what then happens to the loot casket (original rules, results of a 1 or a 6 replaced the loot casket with something else, but 2-5 left as is and potentially could allow any other fighter to repeat the same action in a future turn - although doubt many would allow this). So just a simple tightening up / clarification on the rules.
"Remove the lid and turn the casket over to show its blank side. It plays no further part in the battle."
"Remove the lid and turn the casket over to show its blank side. It plays no further part in the battle."
Similar threads
