I'm interested in helping, hit me up with details and we can talk 
Development discussion
- Thread starter TopsyKretts
- Start date
I'm all for involving as many people as possible, especially people who are prominent members of other Necromunda communities as their "seal of approval" would help evangelize as many players as possible. We'll also need as many people as possible for proof-reading and play-testing. The worst thing that could happen (well, assuming we see this project to the end in the first place of course) is for the YCE to be seen as "TopsyKretts and his merry men's latest collection of house rules".
We'll need to bring them all to Yaktribe if they want to participate in the discussions though.
I also agree that this should not turn into an annex of the Sump (even though the sump is what fuels this project as far as I'm concerned). However, I'm not ready to consider anything SG has produced or will produce as anything but a base to work with. Any clarification or FAQ they come up with should be treated as a mere suggestion and certainly not gospel. I'm done trying to read their mind and if something doesn't work or can be improved, then we should make it work or improve it regardless of what SG says.
We'll need to bring them all to Yaktribe if they want to participate in the discussions though.
I also agree that this should not turn into an annex of the Sump (even though the sump is what fuels this project as far as I'm concerned). However, I'm not ready to consider anything SG has produced or will produce as anything but a base to work with. Any clarification or FAQ they come up with should be treated as a mere suggestion and certainly not gospel. I'm done trying to read their mind and if something doesn't work or can be improved, then we should make it work or improve it regardless of what SG says.
I delegate to you to define what those roles means@TopsyKretts perhaps clearing up what those roles entail would be a good idea- we don't want people getting overburdened, a strong division of labour will be in our best interests. And of course not all suggestions can be implemented, and somebody has to drop the hammer.
I'll look into it tonight... and save my posting for tomorrow. Orngog out
PS if you are reading this, kudos! It's great to see the community come together
I spend some time today summarizing findings from the other discussion about "General Principles".Of course I encourage everyone to come with suggestions and participate, but a lot things are going on at the same time now, so those who wish to change something would most likely have to step in themselves to make that change.
@Petitioner's City sorry sometimes the 'honest' (or blunt?) side suppresses the open and welcoming side. There are many things we can do, I encourage you all to do it. Help the way you can help best. But I'm not personally going to see to it that all the suggestions are followed through. My energy will be limited to yaktribe and the only external resource I will spend time on is google docs. Those of you who suggest other resources are welcome to use that. I can even join some of them, but I won't set up necessarily set up a Trello board for instance. You can advertise on facebook, but I won't create an account there. As Meatloaf said, I would do anything for love (of Necromunda).... but I won't do that 
So I have a (perhaps late) question, are we making a new yaq and yaqerrata effectively, or a new edition? Is that the main or first endpoint? I'd prefer that community house rule document as the first goal, and it's possible to start composing this in that manner, including house rule development? Or are you wanting something more?
New edition. It is not clearly defined, but we do not want 'radical' changes (in this project). However, we will make changes that benefit the game as we - the players - see fit. The main goal of YAQ was to try to clarify rules issues in the way it could be intended officially by GW. After some time and weird/unsatisfactory FAQs from GW, we will change the game to our own liking, regardless of how it was originally intended by GW.
This does not have to be the 'final' version. Others are free to continue the development later, or even revisit and overrule the decisions we make. Anyone can do what they want. We do this because we want to.
I will personally see to it that we have a complete YCE rules compilation as a result, available from the Black Market. I am however an amateur at layout, so it would be very useful if you would do something similar with better wording and layout.
Another result will be a simple document summarizing our rulings with reference to official rule books for what they replace or extend. This is useful for those who want to keep using the original books. I'm not going to be responsible for this. It will not have any legal issues, so expect this to be Common from the Trading Post.
If you want to make sure this can be a complete rules document, you can relax for now. We are only starting out finding issues. It will most likely take months before we can agree on a result that can be used to compile a complete YCE rules document.
This does not have to be the 'final' version. Others are free to continue the development later, or even revisit and overrule the decisions we make. Anyone can do what they want. We do this because we want to.
I will personally see to it that we have a complete YCE rules compilation as a result, available from the Black Market. I am however an amateur at layout, so it would be very useful if you would do something similar with better wording and layout.
Another result will be a simple document summarizing our rulings with reference to official rule books for what they replace or extend. This is useful for those who want to keep using the original books. I'm not going to be responsible for this. It will not have any legal issues, so expect this to be Common from the Trading Post.
If you want to make sure this can be a complete rules document, you can relax for now. We are only starting out finding issues. It will most likely take months before we can agree on a result that can be used to compile a complete YCE rules document.
Last edited:
Hey friends - registering interest here to ensure I get updates and can feed in throughout the process. Happy to playtest and feedback. There's a core of around 6 of us in my gaming group I'm sure I can corral into testing things.
For anybody interested, I've set up a Project Management thread for anybody who's interested in taking a leading role in the project. And we have our own dedicated section now!
Heyall! I've skimmed through this thread, interesting stuff!
I like stopping interpreting raw/rai and instead discussing/agreeing what we want.
A few random key motivators for me vs a CE of newmunda:
- too many books sucks
a dense but clear, all in one document. Remove the fat and the crap, and craft a simple and elegant pdf that has everything you need to play. I always cry when I compare my three n95 books with my... too many, i stopped counting, newmunda books. A LOT of that added stuff isnt so great, and fundamentals arent so clear.
- gang management sucks.
No limit/proper mechanism for how many ppl you have in your gang is bad. Only champs and leader in post battle actions is bad. I have never found a game better in getting me that "my guys" feeling than n95, and I want newmundaCE to excell in that area
- campaign management sucks.
Similar to previous point. Give me better cash management, xp and growth path for "my guys" feeling. Scenarios and scenario selection in standard campaign sucks. Snowball effect of a big good gang is too strong. Give me the giant killer bonus back, sweet xp and cred bonus for fighing bigger than you worked well!
Also, am I the only one sometimes confused with victory conditions, bottling, etc...? What a mess vs 25%/50%->leadership test
- tactic cards suck
Not so sure on that one... i like the idea, but the execution isnt so good. We probably dont need that many cards? We need a better inventory of them, and a better way to manage them/handle them.
- no solo/cooperative and no vehicles rules suck
I know I know, these are quite different topics, but I would like to figure out simple extensions to a solid newmunda CE ruleset to allow solo/cooperative play (think dungeon crawler with AI deck) and vehicles play (gorkamorka CE mix in?).
Also: covid sucks, not many options to play games, so I suppose we can mumble about rules and prepare for the future when we can go out and play again ;D
Alright, this post was probably not super constructive, BUT figuring out why anyone would contribute/get involved seems important nonetheless
I like stopping interpreting raw/rai and instead discussing/agreeing what we want.
A few random key motivators for me vs a CE of newmunda:
- too many books sucks
a dense but clear, all in one document. Remove the fat and the crap, and craft a simple and elegant pdf that has everything you need to play. I always cry when I compare my three n95 books with my... too many, i stopped counting, newmunda books. A LOT of that added stuff isnt so great, and fundamentals arent so clear.
- gang management sucks.
No limit/proper mechanism for how many ppl you have in your gang is bad. Only champs and leader in post battle actions is bad. I have never found a game better in getting me that "my guys" feeling than n95, and I want newmundaCE to excell in that area
- campaign management sucks.
Similar to previous point. Give me better cash management, xp and growth path for "my guys" feeling. Scenarios and scenario selection in standard campaign sucks. Snowball effect of a big good gang is too strong. Give me the giant killer bonus back, sweet xp and cred bonus for fighing bigger than you worked well!
Also, am I the only one sometimes confused with victory conditions, bottling, etc...? What a mess vs 25%/50%->leadership test
- tactic cards suck
Not so sure on that one... i like the idea, but the execution isnt so good. We probably dont need that many cards? We need a better inventory of them, and a better way to manage them/handle them.
- no solo/cooperative and no vehicles rules suck
I know I know, these are quite different topics, but I would like to figure out simple extensions to a solid newmunda CE ruleset to allow solo/cooperative play (think dungeon crawler with AI deck) and vehicles play (gorkamorka CE mix in?).
Also: covid sucks, not many options to play games, so I suppose we can mumble about rules and prepare for the future when we can go out and play again ;D
Alright, this post was probably not super constructive, BUT figuring out why anyone would contribute/get involved seems important nonetheless
No it was a great post, you hit some things noone else has.
Bottling requires 3 sets of rolls atm, that could be addressed... I'm not sure what you mean by cash management?
Working gangers back into territories would be good, we'll be staying away from vehicles as I expect official rules for that at some point... And they've already been created by someone super, they're in the vault.
Do you have any interests/skills you could lend to the team?
Love your stuff by the way @dabbk
Bottling requires 3 sets of rolls atm, that could be addressed... I'm not sure what you mean by cash management?
Working gangers back into territories would be good, we'll be staying away from vehicles as I expect official rules for that at some point... And they've already been created by someone super, they're in the vault.
Do you have any interests/skills you could lend to the team?
Love your stuff by the way @dabbk
Scenarios rewards being inconsistent is a pet bugbear (potentially related to cash management). The open war cards do a great job of flattening this in doing a flat 2d6 for the winner, 1 d6 for the loser
It was a great change in the open hive war cards to give rewards also to the loser yes. However, we have only started with the genereal principles and it will be weeks or months before we reach scenarios.
I think a look at scenarios is definitely important.
But perhaps a discussion for after we've gotten the core rules battened down?
But perhaps a discussion for after we've gotten the core rules battened down?
We have a 1st pass of sections to run through. So far we only started on the top item, "general principles". Next section is "The rules (game structure, priority phase, action phase, movement, shooting, close combat, resolve hits, and end phase)". Scenarios is currently the last section, unless we want to change the order.
We could theoretically discuss several topics at the same time, but I think we should first iron out everything about the core rules and playtest the result in the nominal (boring) case (skirmish, generic gang vs generic gang, basic weapons, shootout, etc.) before we tackle scenarios and the like.
But yeah, we definitely need to give scenarios a good, hard, look.
But yeah, we definitely need to give scenarios a good, hard, look.
I will be opening the rules thread soon, there are a few reasons why I haven't already...
Firstly, we need to assemble our teams so we know we can produce this document.
Secondly, our understaffed Suggestions team is busy collating the general principles and I don't to overload them.
Thirdly, we need to instill and exercise a little discipline vis-a-vis our focus on the current section being addressed. We won't be starting up the rewrite until we're at least halfway through the book, so skipping too far ahead could lead to problems.
Now, it may be the case that opening up the further threads will alleviate these problems somewhat; I'm certainly keen to hear everybody's thoughts on the subject.
Firstly, we need to assemble our teams so we know we can produce this document.
Secondly, our understaffed Suggestions team is busy collating the general principles and I don't to overload them.
Thirdly, we need to instill and exercise a little discipline vis-a-vis our focus on the current section being addressed. We won't be starting up the rewrite until we're at least halfway through the book, so skipping too far ahead could lead to problems.
Now, it may be the case that opening up the further threads will alleviate these problems somewhat; I'm certainly keen to hear everybody's thoughts on the subject.
Was going to reply with some things, like Overwatch desperately needing a rewrite and how cool it would be to have the rare trade prices in the weapons/gear description /stats pages, but it is all too much. Best of luck to those who are attempting this undertaking.
*wanders off to continue mucking about with N+ rules for my filthy Scavvies*
*wanders off to continue mucking about with N+ rules for my filthy Scavvies*
@trollmeat that doesn't sound like "too much" to me... please do tell us your thoughts, you've been here too long to stay silent!
I have actually been experimenting with this sort of thing. However, the tables for this game are enormous! Each purchasable item has up to 13 differente costs (1 universal trading post and 1 per gang, 12 gangs total). That's 13 columns for the cost alone. In addition, the weapon stats have 9 columns. And one column must be used for the name of the item. That's a total of 23 columns for the "ultimate" table. It won't fit on any suitable page
