N18 Compendium YAQ (N18)

[Stoof]

Welcome to the YakTribe Community FAQ Discussion thread for the N17 Compendium (or N18 if you prefer).

Our aim here is to weigh in on - as a community - persistent issues which have been either ignored by the Compendium release, confused further by it, or are generally accepted to be mistakes. Join in, have your say, make N17 a clearer and better game!

Issues here will be dealt with by the YakTribe community, independently of GW's rulings. GW rulings (if they're clear enough to merit it) will replace the YakTribe ones in the interest of maintaining parity with the official rules.

This is not a rewrite of core mechanics, nor is it the N17 Community Edition, though it may well go on to influence/form the basis of it. The aim is to clarify and correct - not to entirely rework. You may have a convoluted and confusing houserule that replaces Toxin in its entirety - this is not the place for that, save it for N17CE - this is more a "why does the chain axe have the Parry trait when it should really have Disarm?" kind of thread.

This thread can be used to discuss minor issues that can be sorted out easily (clear mistakes for example). There will be other threads to discuss/vote on bigger issues.

The latest version of the YAQ is available for download HERE.

 

[spafe]

question, are we going for N17C or N18 for the compedium edition?

 

[Thorgor]

I think calling it N18 would be slightly less confusing.

A few things I noticed about weapon profiles:

• Are the Melta and Scarce trait supposed to do anything for the Melta bombs? As written, they are useless (since Grenade already does everything Scarce does and more, and Melta doesn't do anything on a weapon with no short range)
• Is the Chain Axe really supposed to have Parry? This is normally a trait associated with Swords, and other Axes don't have it.
• Shouldn't the Chain Glaive have Rending? Other Chain weapons all have this trait
• Is the Maul really supposed to have negative (well, positive) AP? It's kinda strange when other blunt weapons like the Power Maul or various Hammers (or even unarmed attacks) don't.

The Cults' HWLs need to be updated to reflect the Trading post price changes:

• The GSC Needle pistol should be 30 creds, not 40
• The GSC Heavy stubber should be 130 creds, not 145
• both cults should pay 50 creds for Demo charges, not 65

I think we have a consensus on how Retreat and Charge are supposed to work exactly, but the wording from the rulebook is still quite confusing, so we should clarify that in the YAQ.

Also, there is an interesting discussion about Injury rolls/Lasting injuries/True grit going on in this thread, if you want to chime in.

 

[Thorgor]

Is the Chain Axe really supposed to have Parry? This is normally a trait associated with Swords, and other Axes don't have it.

So, we have an official answer and "explanation" for this one:

I think this could also be useful clarification so here goes:

Especially the last bit about being allowed to reroll a result if the fighter cannot use the skill. This means Juves and Specialists can roll a D4 instead of a D6 on the Savant table.

 

[hellodarren]

• Is the Maul really supposed to have negative (well, positive) AP? It's kinda strange when other blunt weapons like the Power Maul or various Hammers (or even unarmed attacks) don't.

Apparently Andy addressed this on facebook at some point.

 

[Stoof]

Scarce and Grenade are effectively the same thing, but I'm beginning to wonder if Melta is actually meant to apply to anyone hit by it. Powerful, but it's a friggin' melta bomb - it's designed to frag tanks. It's not what's actually written of course (this is an assumption, my copy of the compendium has not yet arrived).

 

[Thorgor]

It's worth noting that Melta Bombs also have the Demolitions trait, meaning they can be used for CC attack against structures. Maybe that's what Melta is supposed to apply to...

 

[Malo]

Scarce and Grenade are effectively the same thing

Scarce weapons can be replenished with an ammo cache whereas Grenades cannot.

 

[FerociousBeast]

+1 vote for calling it N18. "Nate Teen."

I find this sentence from the link above really disturbing for some reason: "We know that in reality blunt weapons are better against armour, but the game isn’t a simulation of reality, it’s about creating an enjoyable game. This solution fits in game terms." Regardless, that appears to be a solid answer to whether or not a weapon can improve armor saves, it can.

 

[Galtarr]

Ok, also reading the link above anyone else itching to try and reverse engineer said weapon pricing formulae?

Thorgor may have a point about melta against structures. Also it would be a bit weird a melta bomb not having melta trait. Giving it the trait that currently doesn't do anything *could* simply be paving way for future effects. A bit like strength stat on Needler - Not used until an effect removes toxin trait.
Personally I'd go either way on melta bombs given it was agreed & consistent.

 

[Thorgor]

A bit like strength stat on Needler - Not used until an effect removes toxin trait.

Amusingly, they just removed the Strength stat from all Toxin weapons

Melta on Melta Bomb could just be for fluff reason, just like the Shock auto-hit wound from that one Delta zone tile. Scarce, on the other hand, I really don't understand.

 

[PolyOne]

The Multiple Weapon Profile explanation strikes me as particularly strange if you don't assume a couple of things. (new compendium - dark box p67)

If i pretend to be a silly rules lawyer as I read it:
- ALL profiles count as having failed if you fail an ammo roll for one of them. So if I fire the solid profile on a shotgun, fail an ammo check, then my executioner profile is lost to the wind?
- If I reload a weapon with several profiles, do I only reload the specific profile or ALL of them? If just one, can I make another profile available again by "reloading" that one too?
- I couldn't find an example where a weapons had two non-limited profiles with different ammo rolls. If they existed, could I I reload a +4 profile, and thus get access to the one with +5?

These issues might have been cleared up in the gangs of necromunda book, but I currently only have the compendium.
Combi weapons might also be affected by this in a weird way.

 

[FerociousBeast]

There's a difference between how weapons with multiple profiles are treated and combi-weapons.

For weapons with multiple profiles, yes, if you fail one ammo test, the whole weapon is unusable until you reload one of the profiles. Makes more sense if you think about it in terms of jams instead of ammo, which the ammo roll is also supposed to represent. However, failing an ammo roll for a solid shot won't cause the "Limited" trait for Executioner ammo to go into effect. As soon as the weapon's reloaded, you can use the Executioner.

For combi weapons, you can still use the other "barrel" if you fail an ammo roll, so failing just prevents you from using the profile that failed.

This is how it's always been, by the way. Not a compendium change.

 

[Malo]

ALL profiles count as having failed if you fail an ammo roll for one of them. So if I fire the solid profile on a shotgun, fail an ammo check, then my executioner profile is lost to the wind?

Looks like it, yes.

If I reload a weapon with several profiles, do I only reload the specific profile or ALL of them? If just one, can I make another profile available again by "reloading" that one too?

No, it states you use one of the profiles of your choice to "reload" it. So if you fail with Scatter, you could reload using either the Solid or Scatter ammo stat.

I couldn't find an example where a weapons had two non-limited profiles with different ammo rolls. If they existed, could I I reload a +4 profile, and thus get access to the one with +5?

Correct.

 

[PolyOne]

However, failing an ammo roll for a solid shot won't cause the "Limited" trait for Executioner ammo to go into effect. As soon as the weapon's reloaded, you can use the Executioner.

Where do you get this from?
Logically this is what I would rule if someone asked me, but it Seems Malo reached the same conclusion as I fished for with my question. By the same logic, I'm pretty sure they don't want all plasma guns to explode due to the unstable trait on one profile because you failed an ammo roll for the standard profile.

The exact wording:
"Should a weapon with more than one weapon profile fail an Ammo check for one of its profiles, it is considered to have failed an Ammo check for all of its profiles."

"...but not for the purpose of traits on other profiles" ?

 

[Forward Assist]

Should Van Saar still have the +1 T cap still?

 

[Malo]

However, failing an ammo roll for a solid shot won't cause the "Limited" trait for Executioner ammo to go into effect. As soon as the weapon's reloaded, you can use the Executioner

Logically this is what I would rule if someone asked me, but it Seems Malo reached the same conclusion as I fished for with my question.

The rule for Limited does actually state:

If a weapon fails an Ammo check while using Limited ammo, they have run out

Underline for emphasis. So in the case of failing on a separate profile, the Limited Trait wouldn't come into effect for the Executioner.

 

[Thorgor]

I couldn't find an example where a weapons had two non-limited profiles with different ammo rolls

Smoke gas grenades for the grenade-launcher. For 15 credits, your frag and krak grenades suddenly reload on 4+ instead of 6+.

 

[PolyOne]

So in the case of failing on a separate profile, the Limited Trait wouldn't come into effect for the Executioner.

Good, cheers
Unstable just mentions "the weapon" though (reading GW4), but not ignoring that trait would just be silly.

For 15 credits, your frag and krak grenades suddenly reload on 4+ instead of 6+.

And that's the silly point I was trying to make

----

My interpretation is that someone wanted to make clear that if you fail an ammo check on a weapon with multiple profiles, you shouldn't be able to just continue with other profiles as if nothing happened. Then they didn't quite think through how it should be worded, and we get odd effects like the ones mentioned.

It's pretty obvious to put on a list of houserules/things to ignore and argue logic though - so perhaps not YAQ worthy.

 

[Malo]

Perhaps some noted caveats to the rule when interacting with certain traits is YAQ worthy.