V3.0 Warband Creation Update

[Tiny]

Inquisition and military teams are kinda supposed to be the benchmark so giving them too much by way of strange abilities seems odd. Once Psykers are sorted out (come on @Tiny, you're taking the p*ss on that one) they should add a little more fluffy options to some warbands. Other than that, fluff is in the mind of the player and I don't want to add too much by way of "must take" options as that is limiting to the player's imagination.

I love the Officer idea for military. Maybe just an upgrade that grants the Leader special ability to more fighters in the same way as the Preachers from cults. Fluffy, easy to implement and not too OTT. Also works for Void Pirates (either an inspirational leader or a bully of a first mate) although would prefer not to give the same upgrade to everyone as then it loses some meaning.

Any further thoughts on this folks?

 

[Meavar]

Overal it looks quite good. I think the inquisition and void pirates might be a bit below the cult/admech power level, but I think you are slowly getting to lower power levels.

I agree with tribe of one. While I see your point Tiny of them being the base, right now they are to light on speical rules compared to the cult for instance.
The military subs compared to the chaos cult:

Subs: This warband is from a planet where mutation is rife and the mutant underclass is conscripted to fight in battle. Non-Leader models in the warband may be mutants.

Which chaos cults can also do (but must pay more for multiple mutations but can also have mutated leaders: and have the following row of special rules:

Capture: Fighters captured by the cult have two choices: repent or die. Warbands can get back captured members by playing a Rescue mission (See NCE Rulebook) and fighters will still be exchanged if both warbands have captured models, but the cult will never pay or ask for ransom demands from other warbands. If the enemy warband doesn't attempt a rescue or fails then the cult leader can try to convert the prisoner as explained below. If a prisoner will not repent or cannot be redeemed then they are burnt together with their tainted equipment.
Redeem: If the Cult captures any enemy fighters who fit the cult's normal hiring restrictions, then the leader can try to convert them to the cult's cause. The cult player rolls 2D6 and adds the leader's Leadership characteristic to the score; the opposing player rolls 2D6 and adds the captured model's Leadership to the score. If the cult leader scores highest then the prisoner becomes a faithful convert. Copy his profile, skills, experience, etc, onto the cult roster. Note the fighter is now classed as a warrior of the cult, meaning he may lose access to skill sets, weaponry and special abilities (e.g. converted heavies lose their ability to use heavy weapons). All of the convert's equipment is also destroyed to cleanse his new enlightened path, but will keep implanted bionic equipment, such as lobo-chips. If the prisoner equals or beats the leader's score then he resists and refuses to repent.
Hidden Devotion: All unsanctioned cults are outlawed in the Imperium and as such usually shroud their activities, though this is not always possible. Non-puritan cults may choose to become Radical upon creation should they wish, otherwise they must roll on the Outlaw chart after each game as normal to see if they are discovered.
Religious Zealotry: All Puritan cult members are subject to Hatred against Radical warbands. Radical cult members are subject to Hatred against Puritan warbands. Leaders and Elites may choose to either gain the Zealot or Preacher skills (not both) shown here instead of choosing a skill upon creation. Preacher: Many high-level cult members are priests or preachers of the faith and as such, have the ability to inspire great courage among their flock. A Preacher gains the same abilities as if they had the "Leader" skill (see Leader entry in NCE rulebook). If the Preacher already has the Leader skill, increase the range of its effects to 12". Zealot: Some of the more fanatical cult members flagellate themselves into a blind rage before joining battle. A Zealot suffers the effects of Frenzy and gains Hatred against everyone.
Recruitment: Chaos Cults may hire up to 2 Warrior or Initiate models from any species not normally allowed by the species list.
Mutants: Chaos Cult members may be Mutants. It is rare for a model to have more than one mutation so the second mutation a model has costs double. A third mutation costs triple and may result in the fighter's degeneration into a mewling Chaos Spawn (see below). Gifts of Chaos: A model which rolls a 2 or 12 for its advance may choose to gain a mutation instead of gaining a skill. Roll a D6 on the following table to determine the model's mutation: 1: Claw 2: Forearm Spines 3: Hideous 4: Tentacle 5: Roll Again: 1-2: Eyestalks, 3-4: Extra Arm, 5-6: Bloated. 6: Roll Again: 1-2: Long Legs, 3-4: Two Heads, 5: Spikes, 6: Wings. Spawndom: A model which has many mutations runs the risk of becoming a Chaos Spawn. If a model gains a third mutation in any way, make a Ld test for the model at the beginning each subsequent battle. If it fails, the model is transformed into a Chaos Spawn. The Spawn counts as part of the Chaos Cult warband for the remainder of the game after which it dies or flees and is removed from the roster.
Demagogue: The leader of a Chaos Undivided warband is always a Preacher as described above. This does not count as one of his additional advances. If the leader does not go out of action during a battle, he may attempt to draw more followers to the cult. After rolling for income, roll a D6. On a 6 you may recruit a Human Initiate for free, who comes equipped with a knife.
Embrace of Chaos: A Cult worshipping Chaos Undivided may hire up to 5 Warrior or Initiate models from any species not normally allowed by the species list.
Mark of Chaos Undivided: Leaders and Elites may choose the Mark of Chaos Undivided instead of one of their normal advances. Any fighter may be given the mark of Chaos Undivided at a cost of 20TG. The model gains the Zealot skill as described above. Note this means it is possible for a Leader or Elite model to become both a Preacher and a Zealot.

 

[Insurgent]

Where are the revisions posted? Do you do new revisions every week?

 

[Insurgent]

@Tiny , did you add the Military assets this week?

My biggest beef with the military assets is that the Eldar and Tau have the same skill sets as the Imperial units.

Throwing Arbites in with the Guard just doesn't seem thoughtful enough for this paramilitary branch of the Imperium. Different tactical doctrine, different capabilities, different mission, different command hierarchy are all reasons why they should be separate. If you want to go really sterile you can say that anyone who picks up arms in the imperium is a paramilitary unit for the imperium unless they are Xenos or Heretic? Goodies Vs. Baddies.

I think the importance of establishing factions gains its strength in three realms.
#1. Diversity, expense, and skills of troop types.
#2. Diversity of Equipment.
#3. Pre and Post battle special rules.
*The word "Diversity" is important in a fluff based role-playing scene but is also reflected in stats, skills, equipment options, and unit cost.

I think Guard, PDF, and Arbites should be separate. But I am getting the sense that there is a big move towards consolidation with this rewrite. In some ways I find this really cool, in other ways I find aspects of this consolidation that stick out like a sore thumb. Examples are, Genestealers in the cult section; Arbites, Eldar and Tau in the military assets. I think one of the big problems even with the V2 inquisimunda rules was applying the same skills to different races in a war band. Eldar Corsairs, Ork Freebooters, and Human Void Pirates shouldn't be using the same skill profile. The argument that a specific skill profile is what make someone a Void Pirate just doesn't hold water when you are fielding Eldar with no agility skills or Orks with no Ferocity skills.

I don't have any immediate solutions to these problems but it can be worked out.

 

[tribeof1]

The species rules address some of that by giving certain species auto access to certain skill tables (Eldar always have access to Agility, for example).

 

[Insurgent]

Where are the full V3 rules posted?

 

[tribeof1]

Nowhere. We are working on them now. The currently approved changes to species are posted in the species thread, though.

 

[Tiny]

@Tiny , did you add the Military assets this week?

Yep, along with the other stuff mentioned in the post above.

I think Guard, PDF, and Arbites should be separate. But I am getting the sense that there is a big move towards consolidation with this rewrite.

On the surface they are mildly different but really they are just humans with guns. Do you really need them to be that different or can all that be achieved by choosing the relevant equipment and skills for your Leader / Elites? Why should [Insert generic human militia with guns here] differ that much from [Insert generic human militia with guns here]? How would you change them?

My biggest beef with the military assets is that the Eldar and Tau have the same skill sets as the Imperial units.

They don't.

The argument that a specific skill profile is what make someone a Void Pirate just doesn't hold water when you are fielding Eldar with no agility skills or Orks with no Ferocity skills.

This is taken care of in the Species list. The exact same skill lists you mention are always available to those species.

*The word "Diversity" is important in a fluff based role-playing scene but is also reflected in stats, skills, equipment options, and unit cost.

An old, old wooden ship?

More seriously, diversity comes from the mind of the player. If you want to be Arbites, paint some guys in black with red trim, equip them with shock mauls, shields, bolters and shotguns and go wild.

As with your feedback on the previous update, thank you for your input. I don't mind if you don't like what I have written but please come up with alternatives. Just saying that something sucks doesn't help as much as you might think.

Feedback so far seems to note a fluff / power drop in later warbands so I will look to add some additional special rules, maybe in the form of Leader/Elite skills for those warbands.

 

[Insurgent]

@Tiny , why are we moving away from the "Outlander model" of warband creation? Inquisimunda V2 wasn't perfect but it was a titanic step in the right direction.

Inquisimunda needed to start the warband section with about nine pages of outlaw/heresy tables, various faction territory charts, trade rules, and scenario tables.

Each outlanders faction started with a couple of paragraphs of fluff and then has a clear section in all caps labeled SPECIAL RULES. These had differences but all followed a similar pattern and told you everything important about the Outlander gang.
SPECIAL RULES
OUTLANDERS.
TERRITORY.
INCOME.
TRADING.
HIRED GUNS.
STARVATION.
BOUNTY.
CAPTURE.
SCENARIOS.

As long as you have this covered on the front end I don't care if there are 6-12 troop profiles to choose from. That's what gives the warband character to me. The part that Inquisimunda V2 was missing was a paragraph of fluff before every troop profile.

It can be said that Inquisimunda V2 split hairs with many special rules for various warband options and templates. This is a departure from the Outlander model that only had one kind of Scavvy gang, one type of Redemptionist, one type of Ratskin, one type of Spyre. Oh well, all these options were really interesting and in some cases accommodated several warband profiles with a few minor rules. If there are issues with balance then just make these warband options cost something upon warband creation.

Inquisimunda V2 had a bucket of typos and needed some tinkering. It was so close to being great, why don't we keep the foundation?

 

[tribeof1]

@Insurgent : That ship sailed awhile ago, with the consensus (i.e., the clear majority of posters voting) being that the V2 warbands were too unbalanced due to the horde of -- often unnecessary -- individual profiles and troop allowances, etc. @Tiny proposed the more standardized warband base, with standard profiles and troop allowances (similar to but expanded from Necro) that could then be diversified via species and fewer special rules. Again, the response from posters who have weighed in has been very supportive (though not unanimous). It's certainly worth weighing in with your opinion as we go, but @Tiny is drafting his V3 warband rules at the direction of the majority, per past votes and posting.

 

[Insurgent]

I'll be sailing in a different direction then. I don't think the problems are where you think they are. I think the issue is with the lack of an outlaw/heresy system and multiple territory tables.

I don't want to go the same direction 40K has gone and limit options and customization. I don't think we need to take the lead from 40K in rules or fluff.

If point costs and troop limits need to be adjusted, fine. But I think Inquisimunda V2's troop selections were the best thing produced in the 40k franchise in the last ten years. Personally, I will attempt to build upon that foundation.

 

[Tiny]

@Tiny , why are we moving away from the "Outlander model" of warband creation?

Because the "Outlander model" is fine for a game which needs very little customisation in each gang and where you only need 4-5 different fighter types in 4-5 different, yet very specific gang options.

Simply put, it doesn't work for something with as wide a scope as Inquisimunda.

Once we get into adding things like 0-1 Sister Repentia or 0-1 Tech Priest, it is not difficult to realise that everything in the universe could be given a 0-1 profile in many of the warbands.

That ends up in pages upon pages of 0-1 entries in warbands and questions like "why can't I have x model in my y warband?".

I don't want to go the same direction 40K has gone and limit options and customization.

If anything, V2 limits options and customisation. An example I gave way back on p4:

How is being told you can have 0-1 Techpriest in an Inquisitor warband in any way helpful to creating a narrative compared to being able to say "this Elite has a shotgun, servo arm and the Weaponsmith and Hip Shooting skills. He represents John Smith, a crazed Ex Techpriest of the mechanicum turned bounty hunter for the Ordo Xenos?

I will guarantee that my verison has a lot more scope to be creative and "forge the narrative" than the previous one. Mine allows you to free reign to choose who your guys represent rather than being told who they are before you start.
​

What is it you feel you will be missing out on? Tell me which warband / fighter you like from V2 that you cannot make now and I will find a way to incorporate it.

If however you want me to tell you that your standard Ganger statline with a shotgun and carapace armour is one of 0-2 Arbites you're allowed in a warband, that ain't going to happen. You can decide who is who in your own warband.

Anyhow @Insurgent , if you choose to continue to develop on V2 system, that is cool and I wish you all the best.

 

[Squeekademus]

I'm just going to echo what @tribeof1 said about Void Pirates lacking flavor. The inclusion of "types" to include both traders and pirates seems forced for simplicities sake and both sides suffer for it.

I'd rather have Traders and Pirates have their own warbands because their goals and methods differ wildly. It allows more flavor to both sides.

 

[Tiny]

I'm just going to echo what @tribeof1 said about Void Pirates lacking flavor. The inclusion of "types" to include both traders and pirates seems forced for simplicities sake and both sides suffer for it.

I'd rather have Traders and Pirates have their own warbands because their goals and methods differ wildly. It allows more flavor to both sides.

Not sure which Traders you mean. The Void Pirates warband list does not encompass Rogue Traders (or any other "Traders" except those who trade in slaves or illicit goods).

Can you give more details of what you don't like? Maybe some examples of what you would like to see instead?

 

[Squeekademus]

I was under the impression you'd included RTs under Void Pirates as you said in your third draft post (I think, page 6) you had added RTs but I couldn't find them.

 

[Tiny]

I was under the impression you'd included RTs under Void Pirates as you said in your third draft post you had added RTs.

Yeah, sorry, that was a mistake in the update post which I have since amended. I had put Rogue Traders as the weekly update but it was meant to say Void Pirates. I had started working on RT that week and confused myself.

RT will be part of a different warband, possibly combined with Nobles (including a Tau diplomatic party) as they seem to have a lot of the same stuff and similar agendas.

 

[spafe]

Great stuff going on here. I'm generally being swamped with 'not Yak related life issues atm' (or nyrlia for short). So I've not read the warbands yet. However while this is still generating good discussion and productive feedback for @Tiny to work on, I'll be leaving this open a few days longer.

One idea (without reading as I mentioned, curses nyrlia!), for the void pirates... could the sub leader idea be inspiring to intiates... representing them bullying the lower swabbies into place, but without gaining full inspiring to the crew (as what captiain wants that much loyalty to his first mate that it runs risk of mutiny!). Just a thought.

 

[Tiny]

One idea (without reading as I mentioned, curses nyrlia!), for the void pirates... could the sub leader idea be inspiring to intiates... representing them bullying the lower swabbies into place, but without gaining full inspiring to the crew (as what captiain wants that much loyalty to his first mate that it runs risk of mutiny!). Just a thought.

I like it very much.

 

[Tiny]

How about:

Bullies: Upon creation, Elite models may use one of their normal advances to gain the following special rule:

Bully: The model counts as having the Leader special rule (see NCE). Any Warrior or Initiates within range of this model's Leader ability must re-roll any failed Ld tests. If the re-roll is also failed, that model suffers a wound which may be saved as normal.
​

Or something along those lines. Gives a pretty nice bonus but also a potentially nasty downside.

 

[tribeof1]

How about:

Bullies: Upon creation, Elite models may use one of their normal advances to gain the following special rule:

Bully: The model counts as having the Leader special rule (see NCE). Any Warrior or Initiates within range of this model's Leader ability must re-roll any failed Ld tests. If the re-roll is also failed, that model suffers a wound which may be saved as normal.
​

Or something along those lines. Gives a pretty nice bonus but also a potentially nasty downside.

Interesting. I like the theme, but the drawback is pretty significant. I'd either make the Bully quality free (so no spending an advance) or make the re-roll (and risk of a wound) optional.