Storey 456 Necromunda Map campaign


Jan 1, 2016
Blenheim, NZ
Hi all

I have written a Necromunda campaign. But...

I have not actually played Necromunda since the late 90's and as such I am way out of date with rules, scenarios and stuff. So I wanted to post it here for a bit of a critique. Will it 'work'?

I have special rules for each region on the map some from the rule book and some from my own head etc. Thoughts?

feel free to criticize.

had to put it on drop box as it is over 1MB Campaign Storey 456.pdf?dl=0
  • Like
Reactions: p0dde
wow, this looks fairly extensive... I'll start having a read now but might not be able to comment on it all...

First impression... When laying out the map... love the detail, have you balanced it? A quick flick through shows me (not got to the capture/taking land section yet), that I want to take (for instance), 1, 8, 7 15, 16 and 17 (all located next to each other), to give me several high earners, a medic skill and trade reroll plus the ability to hit other point son the map to open up more fronts with my high earning gang...

If you have looked into this and everywhere can earn this well that's fine, if not one way I suggest (just for the money side), is to colour code the map, say red high earner, blue mid earner, yellow low earner, green low earner with other rule (tunnels, vents, maybe the skill givers), then space them evenly over the map. The jump points to other parts of map can just be evenly spaced.

hmm, actually got through it all quickly... very rules light at the end...

I would say each player must have a chance to claim a sector (meaning they can defend against another palyer on a sector they couldn't capture without giving up their chance to attack somewhere else and claim one for themselves).

Does every player only start with one sector?

I would suggest saying that injuries and exp are done after every game, but that trading and income are done at the end of each round (so a palyer could defend an unobtainable sector, get exp, risk injurys but not claim money), that way everyone will advance equally in terms of income.

The only other issue you might want to put in is a method for if say a palyer cannot make it one week/month/session, so either another can defend on their behalf if attacked or players cannot attack them, but gangs only get one pass, if they bail on the next time then they auto lose.

what happens if a gang loses their home base? maybe half income next turn while they set up antoher?
i agree every one should have the opportunity to claim a sector but I keep it to only being able to claim an adjacent sector so people had to go for low income stuff rather than pick and choose from the whole map. Every player starts with a sector that is a 1d6x10 as their base. I like the idea of the rules for if the base is lost. and I will definitely add I will also add in your ideas about when to do injuries and trades etc and also if people cannot play allowing someone else to play on their behalf but only once.

I have done what you suggested on the map and mostly it is fine and spaced out but I have 2 trade re-roll sectors next to each other and also no 2d6x10's in the north east quarter of the map so I will need to go back and make changes to that. Thanks very much for your feedback very helpful indeed.
  • Like
Reactions: spafe
Really interesting. I'm really interested in playing a map campaign as well, but i can't commit to the regular 2 games a week that a turn based one would require, and i didn't like how you can get boxed in and end up only playing against one or two other opponents.

I think you could find some attacking/defending rules that better reflect the way in which we would normally, informally organise games:
When 2 players agree to play each other, they flip a coin, whoever wins attacks. In the following game between these players, the other player attacks. Whomever attacks can opt for either an assault or a mission.

N.B. The threshold for a crushing victory is: loser sustain at least 3 casualties, and winner sustains 1/3 of the number of casualties that the loser does (or lower)

Assaults - pick a territory (DTER) that borders one of your own territories (ATER), (if it borders 2, elect which territory you are attacking from).
Attacker any victory - gains territory (DTER)
Defender Crushing Victory - gains territory that was attacked from (ATER)
Defender normal victory - nothing

Missions - Pick any territory (DTER) your opponent owns.
Attacker Crushing victory - gains territory (DTER)
Attacker normal victory - nothing
Defender any victory - defender gains d6 creds. If attacker has any creds; loses d6 creds

BTW, for narrative purposes:
Assaults represent an all out ground assault, and subsequently, give the attacker a good chance of taking the opponent's territory, but also leave them open to counter attack if the over-reach and leave themselves unable to defend their territory.

Missions represent probing attacks or covert espionage which serves some higher purpose. The intention is just to disrupt, but if the resistance they encounter is weak, there is no reason not to set up shop. However the gear that they take with them can sometimes be lost ion the way back to base, so there can be some costs

Sometimes people also play rules that give combat bonuses for having more territories bordering the battleground. I'm not such a fan of this, as it can encourage boring decision making. It might be nice to have rules instead, like "if you control territories that are on opposite sides of the battlefield, you get a bonus, as I feel that might benefit the taking of risks.
Last edited: