N18 House of Faith

gothjuice

Juve
Jun 3, 2018
27
33
33
Brisbane City QLD, Australia
I will never understand why Overseer doesn’t require a Leadership check when so many other Leadership abilities do. At least put some risk on it. Maybe even Commanding Presence.
Also think mental skills should let you manipulate Mission Selection and Tactics Cards.
I would prefer if it Ld to pass and gave 1actipn from the leader to another model within 6 inch.
I'd rather have less powercreep than more. Also a lot of the power comes from exploitation of some rule flaw, be it underpriced fighters (Goliath, Van Saar) or mechanics with little counter and tons of free buffs sprinkled everywhere (Cawdor,CGC). Van Saar are not as crazy when they base their list on rad weapons. Goliaths are not as crazy when genesmithing is used for narrative purposes and their gang is melee based (little tricks to get into close combat). It makes it harder for players to organise gangs of the same powerlevel against each other. I hope you get the idea.

If anything I'd say that Orlock and Escher are too fair when compared to other gangs, rather than too weak.
I think this is key to recognise. Players should be balancing themselves in their own group. I.e. if you are playing with narrative friends play less gamey and vice versa.

The dream though right?
 

gothjuice

Juve
Jun 3, 2018
27
33
33
Brisbane City QLD, Australia
@TopsyKretts "I honestly wish the game made more use of mental stats to force players to roleplay their gang better..."
I added archaeotech caches to the campaign I am currently moving. To move an archaeotech cache you use a Basic action to make an Int check, if passed you can make a Move simple with the cache.

If a gang gets a cache to within 3" of their deployment zone they claim it. They then roll a d6 which corresponds to a table i produce each week and each value has an item(s) on it.

If the cache is unclaimed at the end of game, remaining gangs may make an Int check with the nearest standing and active fighter to claim it.

This was combined with every gang earning a flat 125 credits per week.
 

Neil McLellan

Ganger
Jun 16, 2018
120
117
43
Orange Park, FL
Now that we've seen the Redeemer and Malakev will be the first House Agent models officially released, rules question:

1. If you have Allies, you can not roll on the House Favours Table
2. You either petition a House Agent or roll on the House Favours table

No mention that I can find that you cannot have Allies and petition for a House Agent. Is that correct, or am I overlooking something? Can't be intentional, can it...?

Something I noticed: the Redeemer is an Outlaw, so a law abiding Cawdor gang cannot hire him.
Weirdly Deacon Malakev is not an Outlaw? I guess the “Dedicated Follower” rule overrides the fact that otherwise these two could not be in the same gang?
Annoyingly both the Cawdor only Hangers On are also Outlaws.
The Executioner is the only one that is legal. And Rattus will join either law or Outlaw.
And I guess depending on whether you follow this book’s Outlaw rules or another book decides whether you can have Stig Shamblers and/or the various pets as an Outlaw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TopsyKretts

gothjuice

Juve
Jun 3, 2018
27
33
33
Brisbane City QLD, Australia
Something I noticed: the Redeemer is an Outlaw, so a law abiding Cawdor gang cannot hire him.
Weirdly Deacon Malakev is not an Outlaw? I guess the “Dedicated Follower” rule overrides the fact that otherwise these two could not be in the same gang?
Annoyingly both the Cawdor only Hangers On are also Outlaws.
The Executioner is the only one that is legal. And Rattus will join either law or Outlaw.
And I guess depending on whether you follow this book’s Outlaw rules or another book decides whether you can have Stig Shamblers and/or the various pets as an Outlaw.
The biggest thing that pisses me off is what @TopsyKretts pointed out at one point, "Purely redemptionist gangs cannot hire Cherub-servitors during a campaign."

I understand I could run a 50/50 mix and switch in and out of law-abiding/outlaw, or run a law-abiding gang with a redemptionst leader/champs but it seems stupid that the Cherub-servitor didn't have an additional/rule/exemption whatever to allow it to be hired by outlaws. Personally, I think it would be more interesting if the gang had to be Outlaws to hire them.
 

almic85

Cranky Git
Tribe Council
Oct 30, 2014
1,991
3,445
163
Palmerston, ACT, Australia
The rules around outlaw and law abiding are pretty poor in general. There are a lot of small things that fall foul of the rules and with pets now being freely accessible by Leaders and Champions it has blurred the line further.

What would have been better was a system where if something is designated as Law Abiding then it is restricted to Law Abiding Gangs, if something is designated as Outlaw then it is restricted to Outlaw gangs, and if something is not designated to either then anyone can take it.

I think the common sense answer is that pets should now be considered wargear and have the alignment of their owner.

Brutes are another strange place to implement the law abiding / outlaw rules and could do with being house rules to ignore the rule. Honestly I can’t imagine that a gang should ever be running around with an Ambot regardless of which side of the law they sit on.
 

gothjuice

Juve
Jun 3, 2018
27
33
33
Brisbane City QLD, Australia
The rules around outlaw and law abiding are pretty poor in general. There are a lot of small things that fall foul of the rules and with pets now being freely accessible by Leaders and Champions it has blurred the line further.

What would have been better was a system where if something is designated as Law Abiding then it is restricted to Law Abiding Gangs, if something is designated as Outlaw then it is restricted to Outlaw gangs, and if something is not designated to either then anyone can take it.

I think the common sense answer is that pets should now be considered wargear and have the alignment of their owner.

Brutes are another strange place to implement the law abiding / outlaw rules and could do with being house rules to ignore the rule. Honestly I can’t imagine that a gang should ever be running around with an Ambot regardless of which side of the law they sit on.
Which is a shame cause I think it is an interesting concept, I love the idea of doing a campaign where the only gangs allowed are House Gangs (Normal or Infected or Corrupted) and Enforcers. Where the enforcers are trying to maintain order, while all the house gangs start out Misrule and are in an open gang war.

Yeah, I also agree here where it's mostly clear what is Outlaw only but then kinda vague as to whether things that aren't outlaw are available to everyone (particularly Hangers on).
 

almic85

Cranky Git
Tribe Council
Oct 30, 2014
1,991
3,445
163
Palmerston, ACT, Australia
Which is a shame cause I think it is an interesting concept, I love the idea of doing a campaign where the only gangs allowed are House Gangs (Normal or Infected or Corrupted) and Enforcers. Where the enforcers are trying to maintain order, while all the house gangs start out Misrule and are in an open gang war.

Without the Law Abiding and Outlaw rules this is pretty much any campaign that you choose to add that narrative to.

There’s actually a lot more mileage in the game if you restrict gangs to house gangs and only allow extra gangs where they narratively fit in. It saves you having a strange campaign where there are more non-house gangs running around than house gangs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gothjuice

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,885
4,821
193
Norway
There are some things that could be implied here. Perhaps the Outlaw rules in BoF is supposed to override the universal Outlaw rules? As someone pointed out, a lot of the Outlaw rules are only applicable to the Law & Misrule campaign, so will be ignored in the majority of campaigns.

And lastly, if the gang is Outlaw, it doesn't care to break any rules to get those Cherubs. Break the rules!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BearsWillEatYou

cardyfreak

Executive Officer in charge of Radishes
Staff member
Necromunda Custodian
Tribe Council
Sep 15, 2012
3,953
6,364
188
38
Alnwick, Northumberland
yaktribe.games
I’d be more than happy to say that the lawful/outlaw status only applies after a gang is created, so the gang can hire whatever it wants during creation. I’d ignore a lot of the caveats if it made narrative sense to do so though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BearsWillEatYou

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,885
4,821
193
Norway
That puts a lot of pressure on gang creation and makes the build vulnerable to casualties in the campaign (similar to death of a leader). Also motivating to restart gangs if you lose the stuff you cannot regain.
 

Crazy Ivan

Gang Hero
Nov 5, 2019
733
2,084
108
38
Culemborg, the Netherlands
Honestly, I think Outlaws should be able to access everything - equipment, pets, brutes, most hangers-on. It doesn't make sense for them to "play by the rules" and not get stuff because it's the "wrong alignment". They can steal a normal ambot or cherub, if need be. For Hangers-on, at least for the basic types, it doesn't make sense that you couldn't have an "even more" Rogue Doc who works for Criminals, or why no Outlaws could ever hire a Lookout or whatever.

It that makes Outlaws overpowered (because having restrictions on what Law-abiding gangs can access does make sense), then make the general drawbacks worse, like adding reputation to Law-Abiding gangs who win from Outlaws (or taking reputation away from Outlaws who lose from Law-abiding gangs, reflecting their "criminal street-cred", or something).
 

Neil McLellan

Ganger
Jun 16, 2018
120
117
43
Orange Park, FL
Something I noticed: the Redeemer is an Outlaw, so a law abiding Cawdor gang cannot hire him.
Weirdly Deacon Malakev is not an Outlaw? I guess the “Dedicated Follower” rule overrides the fact that otherwise these two could not be in the same gang?
Annoyingly both the Cawdor only Hangers On are also Outlaws.
The Executioner is the only one that is legal. And Rattus will join either law or Outlaw.
And I guess depending on whether you follow this book’s Outlaw rules or another book decides whether you can have Stig Shamblers and/or the various pets as an Outlaw.

would be cool if you could just hire Redeemer and role to see if Outlawed
The biggest thing that pisses me off is what @TopsyKretts pointed out at one point, "Purely redemptionist gangs cannot hire Cherub-servitors during a campaign."

I understand I could run a 50/50 mix and switch in and out of law-abiding/outlaw, or run a law-abiding gang with a redemptionst leader/champs but it seems stupid that the Cherub-servitor didn't have an additional/rule/exemption whatever to allow it to be hired by outlaws. Personally, I think it would be more interesting if the gang had to be Outlaws to hire them.
The Outlaw rules in House of Faith say nothing about Exotic Beasts, so Outlaw Redemptionists can still hire cherubs, at least if you playing Dominion campaign that doesn’t have any conflicting rules.
 

Crazy Ivan

Gang Hero
Nov 5, 2019
733
2,084
108
38
Culemborg, the Netherlands
Thinking about this, having an Outlaw House Agent is contradictory by itself, as the whole point of being an Outlaw is being disavowed by your House as well as general Necromundan society. But then again, Cawdor Redemptionist Outlaws seem to be different from Outlaws from other Houses, as well as, presumably, non-Redemptionist Cawdor Outlaws (i.e., Cawdor gangs outlawed for another reason than their association with the Redemption), as the book makes quite clear that House Cawdor fully supports the Redemptionists, just not publicly. So in that sense Cawdor Redemptionists should just have access to all the House offers as the House will supply them anyway, just covertly. They're quite different from say an Escher gang who are overtly working with Xeno-smugglers, a Genestealer-infected Orlock gang, Chaos-worshipping Goliaths, or Van Saar archeotechs working overtly against the dictates of their clan and Helmawr's laws.
 

Jacob Dryearth

Gang Hero
Sep 6, 2016
1,173
1,529
128
Yeah, I also agree here where it's mostly clear what is Outlaw only but then kinda vague as to whether things that aren't outlaw are available to everyone (particularly Hangers on).
It's pretty explicit in the Book of Judgement that Outlaws can only hire Outlaw Hangers-on, and that that may hire both Outlaw and regular Hired Guns who gain the Outlaw rule. Brutes are a type of Hanger-on, and so strictly by the rules outlaws cannot hire Ogryns or Ambots, which is why they made that article with Scrapcode Ambots etc.

I have house ruled that Outlaws may hire regular hangers-on as well who gain the Outlaw rule, just like Hired guns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crazy Ivan

JezzaC

Juve
Jan 27, 2016
27
45
33
Perth WA
So. Zealots.

While they are getting +1WS and +1Cl advances for 20creds, a 10cred 'discount' compared to advancing a Bonepicker and without requiring XP, I'm struggling to figure out what their niche is.

Bonepickers are the obvious choice for cheap fodder, and you're highly incentivised to have ~3 of them knocking around for their special rule. Brethren (Either flavour) are a better choice for some flexible fighters who can shoot and fight.

So what are Zealots for? The only thing that makes them stand out is access to the 2-Hand CC weapons and the Eviscerator, but the 2-Hand weapons are total garbage (And they don't have access to the solid Greatsword), and the Eviscerator is mega-expensive on 1 Attack 1 Wound model.

I think people have missed what the Eviscerator actually is. They keep thinking its a 90 credit two handed melee weapon with +1 Str, -1 AP and Sever. Which would be extremely underwhelming if that's all it was. But look at the stats, the flamethrower attached to the Eviscerator isn't just another one shot exterminator, its a normal flame weapon and arguably a little better than a hand flamer (better AP, but has scarce). A hand flamer is 75 credits, so that chainsaw becomes a hand flamer with a 15 cred two handed melee weapon attached. Which is pretty decent. Now, who would you give a weapon like that to? Well, what about a juve with Movement 6 and WS 4+? That's the Zealot's niche. It isn't crazy good, but its pretty solid.

The next question is why you'd do this with a Zealot over a Brethren. Movement 6 is a pretty good reason by itself but the other reason is skill advancement, you know that when you get the Zealot to 6XP you can get to that all important WS upgrade, but the Brethren will have to roll on the random advancement table, and are likely to get something useless.

Really the question for me is the opposite - there's a big incentive to take the 'bonus' bonepickers, and there's a niche for Zealots with Eviscerators as low cost flamers with backup melee. Cawdor Brethren have a place, you get one as a 'bonus', and you can take more as the blunderpole is still really solid. But what's the place for Redemptionist Brethren? Once you've taken all those other guys you don't need any more Gangers & Juves to have equal numbers with your leaders & champions. The only thing I can think of is to use one as a specialist, if you really want a Fire Pike or a Grenade Launcher.
 

JayTee

Ganger
Jun 14, 2015
156
284
63
To me the Zealot isn't competing with the Brethren, it's competing with a Deacon. Zealots seem to be designed to be hard-hitting CC fighters given their weapon access, but that's also a very viable setup on a Deacon. They are slightly-more-than twice as expensive, so less bodies on the field, but in Cawdor you're very likely to have the Activation upper-hand, and due to the massive incentive to have at least 4 Gang fighters you're unlikely to be concerned about gang composition.

I'd definitely much rather take an Eviscerator on a Deacon than on a Zealot, the extra attack, extra wound, and Skill more than make up for the -1Mv.

Redemptionist Brethren get access to Exterminators and Shotguns I guess? They do also have arguably better stats as Cl and Wil are better, and Ld and Int are largely useless.
 

Jacob Dryearth

Gang Hero
Sep 6, 2016
1,173
1,529
128
To me the Zealot isn't competing with the Brethren, it's competing with a Deacon. Zealots seem to be designed to be hard-hitting CC fighters given their weapon access, but that's also a very viable setup on a Deacon. They are slightly-more-than twice as expensive, so less bodies on the field, but in Cawdor you're very likely to have the Activation upper-hand, and due to the massive incentive to have at least 4 Gang fighters you're unlikely to be concerned about gang composition.

I'd definitely much rather take an Eviscerator on a Deacon than on a Zealot, the extra attack, extra wound, and Skill more than make up for the -1Mv.

Redemptionist Brethren get access to Exterminators and Shotguns I guess? They do also have arguably better stats as Cl and Wil are better, and Ld and Int are largely useless.
The Deacon is for grenade launchers, one weapon the kit does not have.
 

JezzaC

Juve
Jan 27, 2016
27
45
33
Perth WA
To me the Zealot isn't competing with the Brethren, it's competing with a Deacon. Zealots seem to be designed to be hard-hitting CC fighters given their weapon access, but that's also a very viable setup on a Deacon. They are slightly-more-than twice as expensive, so less bodies on the field, but in Cawdor you're very likely to have the Activation upper-hand, and due to the massive incentive to have at least 4 Gang fighters you're unlikely to be concerned about gang composition.

I'd definitely much rather take an Eviscerator on a Deacon than on a Zealot, the extra attack, extra wound, and Skill more than make up for the -1Mv.

Redemptionist Brethren get access to Exterminators and Shotguns I guess? They do also have arguably better stats as Cl and Wil are better, and Ld and Int are largely useless.

Yeah, if you want a hard hitting CC unit then you go for the Deacon every time. The extra attack is a huge point of difference. But the point is that if you want a hard hitting CC unit then you're giving hims chainaxes. The eviscerator is a flamer with a secondary use in melee. Putting that on a deacon and hoping he works as a hard hitting CC fighter is a huge gamble because he's still only WS4+ and the eviscerator prevents him getting a secondary weapon attack.

So if you're taking eviscerators, it should be because you want a flamer (well, another flamer) that can also do some good work in melee. Paying for a Deacon for that role means not using his higher BS, and most of the time not using his extra attack, and making him not that reliable in melee when he does get there.

That said, there's a lot of different ways to play, especially with the new books. I'm just thinking through the theory at this point.
 

gothjuice

Juve
Jun 3, 2018
27
33
33
Brisbane City QLD, Australia
Yeah, if you want a hard hitting CC unit then you go for the Deacon every time. The extra attack is a huge point of difference. But the point is that if you want a hard hitting CC unit then you're giving hims chainaxes. The eviscerator is a flamer with a secondary use in melee. Putting that on a deacon and hoping he works as a hard hitting CC fighter is a huge gamble because he's still only WS4+ and the eviscerator prevents him getting a secondary weapon attack.

So if you're taking eviscerators, it should be because you want a flamer (well, another flamer) that can also do some good work in melee. Paying for a Deacon for that role means not using his higher BS, and most of the time not using his extra attack, and making him not that reliable in melee when he does get there.

That said, there's a lot of different ways to play, especially with the new books. I'm just thinking through the theory at this point.
I'm with you on this.
I'm thinking that Evi will be better on Zealots and Priest, and that dual chainaxes will work better for a melee Deacon.