Rules suggestions - Resolve hits

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,634
4,577
193
Norway
Yeah, I do not support your suggestion here. I think we have to leave all "bonus saves" from skills and special rules as they currently are, and instead clarify whether they stack or not. We could introduce a keyword and stop them from stacking?
 

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
Adding a stackable or unstackable keyword is not a bad idea.

But I think dividing equipment that gives a 'save' into 4 categories and stating a fighter can have one of each is the way to go for a start.

1. Armour
2. Under/overlay
3. Fields (in love the suggestion that falsehoods take this slot, but they would still need more rework IMHO)
4. Weapons that grant save bonuses (aka shields)

The keyword would be for the few niche items or skills that fall outside it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ledward

Galtarr

Gang Hero
Mar 1, 2017
945
1,605
118
Agreed the special saves at the moment arent better than 4+ and generally have some downsides at that level.

It's a fair point that 2+ armour saves are possible and perhaps heavy carapace at least should have some more downsides (it is expensive mind).
Special saves aren't the issue. It's stacking regular saves to get 3+ and 2+, or better.

I'd be up for 3+ saves to be -1 I/M and 2+ save -2 I/M regardless of how they got there.

(I realise Hvy carapace is only 3+ in front 90° arc and only suffers -1M on charge so we could extend the rule for -ve to be on charge only for partial arc saves like Hvy carapace or Furnace, though it more complex)

Field armours have built in weaknesses already so let people have them in addition to regular saves and they might get used more
 
  • Like
Reactions: TopsyKretts

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,634
4,577
193
Norway
That is smooth. I like it!

We still need to clearify how saves are organized. For example moving armoured undersuit/bodyglove from wargear to armour section. Then we add universal rules for categories of armour for what can and cannot be combined. Adding separate rules like GW did to explain that X cannot be used with Y is a dirty solution that will be clean and smooth by this solution. We can also clarify and limit shields in this manner to 0-1. Currently, a fighter can carry and use 3 shields at the same time...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thorgor

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,634
4,577
193
Norway
Adding a stackable or unstackable keyword is not a bad idea.

But I think dividing equipment that gives a 'save' into 4 categories and stating a fighter can have one of each is the way to go for a start.

1. Armour
2. Under/overlay
3. Fields (in love the suggestion that falsehoods take this slot, but they would still need more rework IMHO)
4. Weapons that grant save bonuses (aka shields)

The keyword would be for the few niche items or skills that fall outside it.
What weapons other than shields grant save bonuses? Not all shields are weapons! We could have the 4th category simply as "shields". Also, fields should not be in the normal armour category as it is in addition to normal saves?

We need 2 categories, one for bonus saves, one for armour as previously stated here:
  • Bonus Saves applied on hits (can ignore the hit completely if successful):
    • 0-1 Field saves (applies after being hit and can ignore the hit completely if successful)
    • 0-* Special rules (skills & special rules like step aside, omen of fortune)
  • 0-1 Armour save (2 variants):
    • Standard (can be modified by AP)
    • Invulnerable (cannot be modified by AP)
Standard Armour save can be combined by the following "parts":
  • 0-1 Normal armour
  • 0-1 Shield (either make all shields close combat weapons or introduce a 'Shield' keyword to all shields)
  • 0-1 Combinable armour (undersuits, bodygloves ++)
Invulnerable saves cannot be modified (by shields or combinable armour).
This means that a fighter can roll the following saves when hit/wounded:
  • 0-1 Field
  • 0-* special rules
  • 0-1 armour save (normal OR invulnerable)
This is smooth, clean and has minimal impact on existing rules and maximal future proofing for compatibility with new content.
 
Last edited:

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
What weapons other than shields grant save bonuses? Not all shields are weapons! We could have the 4th category simply as "shields". Also, fields should not be in the normal armour category as it is in addition to normal saves?

We need 2 categories, one for bonus saves, one for armour as previously stated here:

This means that a fighter can roll the following saves when hit/wounded:
  • 0-1 Field
  • 0-* special rules
  • 0-1 armour save (normal OR invulnerable)
This is smooth, clean and has minimal impact on existing rules and maximal future proofing for compatibility with new content.
Fair, although I'm not aware of any invulnerable armour save at the moment (just ones than can ignore some level of AP).

But overall it make sense to me.

Also apologies I forgot the scrap shield isn't a weapon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TopsyKretts

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,634
4,577
193
Norway
There are many things to consider! Scrap shield as you mention, we also have ceramite shield. Mantle Malifica grants 4+ invulnerable save against psychic powers. Armourweave grants 6+ invulnerable save. Plate mail grants 5+ invulnerable save against blasts. I believe some of the CGC masks grant a 6+ invulnerable save too.

I have already categorized and organized saves in my rules compilation. The only thing I missed was that combinable armour must be separate from shields.


How to handle the attacks that specifically completely ignores saves. Obviously any save that can be modified by AP is bypassed. What about bonus saves & fields? Invulnerable saves? Examples:
  • Crushed by Lift/Door (Mind the ...)
  • Treasure casket (Click!)
  • Gas
  • Graviton Pulse
  • Seismic
  • Web
  • Perils of the Warp
 
Last edited:

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Perhaps we could tone down lethality of shooting through these means:
  1. You always do the save roll for armour even if the shot's AP ignores your armour entirely. If you roll equal or above your "base" armour characteristic, but AP of a shot/attack lowered your armour save, the shot has pierced the armour, but was partially robbed of lethal force. Reduce the ammount of rolled injury dice by 1, and if it was 1 originally, opponent rolls 2 injury and you choose 1 out of those (+1 injury dice rolled for each similar effect, you still choose 1 out of those).
  2. Out of action result on Injury dice is downgraded to a Serious Injury when the target is in heavy cover?

How to handle the attacks that specifically completely ignores saves. Obviously any save that can be modified by AP is bypassed. What about bonus saves & fields? Invulnerable saves? Examples:
  • Crushed by Lift/Door (Mind the ...)
  • Treasure casket (Click!)
  • Gas
  • Graviton Pulse
  • Seismic
  • Web
  • Perils of the Warp
I think you just ignore all saves or means of protection when hit by those - dodges, fields, farsight, whatever. "When these hits are resolved, all protective measures of a target are ignored entirely."
 
  • Like
Reactions: TopsyKretts

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,634
4,577
193
Norway
I'm trying to find some good terminology for categorizing saves and attacks/hits in relation to saves. Isn't there something called 'Mortal Wound' in Killteam? How about a mortal hit, since a hit can cause more than a single wound?

  • Save (normal save)
  • Invulnerable save (cannot be modified by AP)
  • Special Save (from skills or abilities)
  • Hit (from a normal attack, can be saved, AP applies normally)
  • Mortal Hit (cannot be saved by any means)
Does this make sense? This is purely cosmetic, it will not change any rules (official or YCE), but will make it easier and cleaner to write rules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JawRippa

Thorgor

Of The YAQ
Oct 12, 2015
4,580
10,522
148
36
Sevres 92130 France
I think you just ignore all saves or means of protection when hit by those - dodges, fields, farsight, whatever. "When these hits are resolved, all protective measures of a target are ignored entirely."
I disagree. In my opinion 'ignore all saves' just means both field and armour saves are ignored. You can dodge a gas cloud the same you can dodge an explosion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Petitioner's City

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
I disagree. In my opinion 'ignore all saves' just means both field and armour saves are ignored. You can dodge a gas cloud the same you can dodge an explosion.
It depends on how do we end up wording the dodge save - maybe it'll end up similar to Familiar/Cariatid when a fighter does not have to move outside of the blast radius to avoid being hit. Also, say, you get knocked into a lingering gas cloud made by an escher chem. Do you dodge it?

For clarity I'd prefer for Necromunda to have a reskin of Mortal wounds, to avoid lengthy descriptions. For example in "Urban renewal" when the ceiling starts to collapse on gangers, anyone stuck in the cave-in zone should simply die instead of being saved by an unforseen interraction from tactic card, piece of equipment or skill.
 

Kiro The Avenger

Gang Hero
Apr 4, 2018
1,224
1,588
128
Bristol, UK
'mortal wounds' are so rare in Necromunda I have no issue with just stating things when they occur.

Only remotely common interaction I can think of is getting shut in a door. In which case just stating "suffers 3 damage" is just simpler.

I also trying to define absolutely every protective measure into some sort of 'save' is just destined to cause problems as you're finding here.
We should have two sorts of saves, field and armour.
Everything else isn't a save per say, but are rules to ignore hits. Such as dodge or precognscience. That way we don't trip over ourselves with overly long explanations at what saves are and aren't allowed every time.
 

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,634
4,577
193
Norway
I always had an idea of anything non-pistol, non-unwieldy melee taking up 2 slots instead of 1. Kinda silly how gangers can carry around a long rifle and still have it easy swinging in melee. Might be a bit too radical and ruin some people's conversions though.
This is a fluff issue, not a problem with mechanics nor balance. The game I'm hoping to achieve will not benefit fighters stacked up on guns (but may benefit a fighter carrying a single backup-gun).