Suitability of Ammo Rolls in Imunda?

[Genghis]

It looks like I might actually get my first game(s) of Imunda in next weekend with a friend, who is also new to it (we'll be playing V3). Whilst statting up my underworld space mobsters I got wondering about the appropriateness of the Ammo Roll mechanic in Imunda.

I played Necromunda in the way back when, and it totally fits that setting of unreliable 3rd hand at best weaponry barely kept functional in the depths of the underhive. However, in Imunda, which features professional (para)military forces it doesn't seem right. Would an inquisitor really tip up with barely enough bolter rds for a couple of bursts, or so badly maintain their weapon it irrevocably jams on their first shot? Whilst my mobsters are not government forces, some of them are professional mercs and all of them have access to new (basic) weaponry & ammo in my setting.

Has anyone else questioned the use of the Ammo Roll mechanic, and if so have you just abandoned it, or modified it in some way?

 

[alphonse]

Hi Genghis, at this scale, a too much reliable shooting phase could produce a short lasting and long range game. I think the introduction of ammo rolls deserve three purposes:

- reduce the weight of the shooting phase in the game
- allow a more surprising game progress
- fluff wise, in inquisimunda, operations are conducted far from the standard reinforcement and support. Even mercenaries have to deal with scare ressources to take care of their weapons and equipment.​

Hope you will enjoy your first game

 

[Draco]

Well, in even the most meticulous of mass production processes, defects arise in equipment that can require correction. Ammo rolls are certainly applicable to inquisimunda.

Inquisitors commonly have to operate behind enemy lines and outside conventional logistical support lines. While bolters are often tactically superior, energy weapons of plasma, lasgun, and melta type weaponry could theoretically charge off of a common generator. Batteries and munition magazines can run out.

A bonus such as considering weapons gaining the "plentiful" trait in certain cases may be appropriate, as well as something similar to the "ammo Jack hangers on" bonus for quality maintenance.

Examples = Escher pdf considering toxin weapons Not to have scarce trait. Van Saar... Plasma? Enforcers... Executioner rounds are not "limited" ect.

Some houses or factions may not consider specific weapons as rare, and/or already acquire such weapons at a discount.

 

[Tiny]

When I get back to finishing off v3 I intend on looking into the possibility of having some factions take ammo rolls on 2d6 instead of 1d6. Particularly non radical Inquisitors, admech and military.

@Draco i guess you're thinking of N17 version as V3 is based on NCE so doesn't have weapon traits etc.

 

[Blood Donor]

The big problem with 2D6 is that its non linear probability curve makes it a rather useless function on the game's linearly escalated stat values. Even the 2D6 Leadership Test is inherently broken by design. D12? Grant re-rolls? I know 2D6 is simplicity based on accessibility, but yeah, I can't get over the probability results in this game design.

As for ammo rolls in general, have to agree on the point @alphonse made in that they are such a game balancing mechanic. Even in defining weapons from one another, ammo roll is a huge one in dictating balance.

 

[Tiny]

Not really useless. In the case of just trying to beat a set value, it simply makes it a lot more likely to pass a roll than on 1D6. e.g. A boltgun normally has a 5/6 chance of failing but on 2D6 it has a 5/18 (1/3.6) chance of failure. An auto gun goes from 1/2 to 1/12. A lasgun on 2d6 has no chance of failure however (although ruling that a double 1 is always a failure could easily mitigate that). Yes, it could break any "fine balance" but given that weapons are costed to the nearest 5 credits, I would say that there's not a lot of "fine balance" in NCE in the first place and if factored into a warband's bonuses would not be an issue.

I have played a lot of Warmachine over the years so pretty well versed in 2D6 game mechanics. They are not as scary as they first seem. It can admittedly be weird thinking of stats in non linear fashion though.

Rerolls would also be an option however still does not offer a great level of reliability for bolt weapons which would be a lot more reliable in the hands of military personnel. D12 is not an option though. NCE is a D6 system.

Anyway that's my piece. This wasn't intended to become a discussion on hypothetical mechanics for a system that I'm not currently even working on. More a clarification that I agree that ammo rolls do not accurately reflect reliability of military weapons and plan to do something to remedy it.

 

[Blood Donor]

...Yes, it could break any "fine balance" but given that weapons are costed to the nearest 5 credits, I would say that there's not a lot of "fine balance" in NCE in the first place...

Lol fair point. Yeah, I think I was viewing it more from a long term balancing thing, but yes for specific tests it is a way to increase probability chances of passing the roll.

 

[Genghis]

Thank-you all for your thoughts.

@alphonse, I can see your point on game balance, etc, but from a personal perspective, the fluff argument doesn't work for me.

My setting has - without wanting to get political about this - American levels of firearms availability to the general populace, at least in some of the rougher parts of the city. Even my mobsters have ready access to ammo & reasonable quality weapons. If they had something exotic, then I can see the case for ammo scarcity, but shotgun cartridges/9mm rds/lasgun charge packs... Likewise, even if an Inquisitor was undercover, without recourse to overt resupply, they'd either be able to get their ammo locally, or if not would make a conscious decision when to ration their rds, not unexpectedly running out in the middle of a firefight. (As for a weapon stoppage more permanent than clearing a stuck rd/cartridge case - that is a very infrequent occurrence.) The unreality of the Ammo Roll mechanic against that background bugs me. (I know, I'm talking about unreality in a setting with aliens, magic & laser guns...)

@Tiny, That's a good idea with using 2D6 (or even D12, which I'm comfortable with), I might try it out as a compromise solution.

 

[alphonse]

@Genghis I totally see your point. When I was talking about game balance, it wasn't from a cost perspective. It was more about the fact that if we can shoot continuously, this will heavily influence the game towards a more "shooty" game (I know, amazing rhetoric art here).

To take your example of American levels of firearms availability, it would seem weird to have any close combat when you can "safely" shoot from a distant position. On a more historic perspective, the introduction of firearms was the death of "classic" knights with swords. No point to have a deadly close combat weapon if you can't get close in the first place.

I wouldn't say Inquisimunda is completely about a realistic fluff, but there is something epic in close combat that you can't get only with firearms.

But to go in your direction, I'm actually working on analyzing the N17 weapons stats, trying to figuring out how things are costed. You know what, Ammo roll has a very very very marginal effect on the cost of a gun. Take for instance the laspistol or the lasgun, 2+ ammo roll & the plentiful trait, they are among the cheapest weapons of the game.

In NCE, there were nice rules that we could adapt to N17 Inquisimunda to get more reliable gunfights: "auto-repairer" (p51), "one in a million" (p54), "weapon reload" (p55) and skills (armourer and weapon smith, p91), workshop (p95). And in Inquisimunda (V1.3), there were "master crafted" (p139), "reloads" (p140) and "Extra ammo" (P142).
In N17 fo now, we just have "Plentiful" (useful if we design our own weapons), "Ammo-jacks" and the Savant skill "Munitioneer".

 

[Blood Donor]

Thread could as easily be titled Suitability of Swashbuckling in I'munda

 

[alphonse]

Lol, that reminds me of the description of a game released some years ago (Pirates of the Caribbean). I haven't played it but I do remember the description sparked my imagination: "Players must demonstrate their cunning, swashbuckling creativity and swordsmanship as they encounter all manner of crazed pirates and cursed creatures in treacherous, exotic locations. Enjoy sword-assisted acrobatics, adaptive combat and classical dueling in unique gameplay."
Jokes aside, I could totally imagine a strike force with reliable guns in Inquisimunda. Maybe we could just allowed them to buy stuff as the ones in my previous post. Alternatively, some warbands could get special rules about ammo, like AdMech in V1.3.

 

[spafe]

On the basis that the Imundas of before (honestly not kept up to date with where you guys are heading in terms of settings (f you are changing it at all), you could have mutant destitute mobs... with rusty weapons and all... I think removing ammo rolls as a whole is a mistake.

Saying that military grade operative warbands roll 2d6, and pick which one (thus making them more likely to pass said ammo rolls), or giving them all weaponsmith (ala old enforcers with their better maintained kit), on a warband wide level would make far more sense to me. Or if your setting for that campaign happens to exist on a world where weapons are handed out like candy, then say all warbands in this campaign ignore ammo rolls. But taking them out of the core rules design to me would be a massive mistake.

Just my 2 creds, feel free to ignore

 

[Genghis]

@alphonse, yup, I can see your point about the balance between firefights and some good swashbuckling. Hopefully my terrain setup (Battle Systems Sci-Fi II printed cardboard terrain, if anyone's familiar with it) should prove sufficiently dense to facilitate the buckling of swashes, even with less Ammo Roll failures.

@spafe, a very good point about not removing the mechanic entirely.