Happy to have a look.I'm having a hard time summarizing all these ideas. Keep in mind that we are making a list as result of the first pass. I could need some assistance as I've only managed to get most of the suggestions from page 1.
Anyone who made suggestions would have to double check they are listed in the google doc.
Actually the size of a spawn base depends on what year you bought it. They were 40mm but at some point changed to 50mm. Just to throw some confusion into the mix.Yes.
I believe we need something a bit clearer than GW's official stance (which can be summed up as "whatever"), especially if we want to allow/encourage using conversions, third party models or models from the old Necromunda range.
Most of the time it's easy: we can just use whatever base the miniatures come with. There are a few outliers though, like Genestealer cultists (unless i'm mistaken, heavy weapon users have 32mm bases while the rest use 25mm — depends on the generation/number of arms?) and the Chaos Spawn (comes with a 50mm, which is maybe a bit too big for Necromunda as all brutes so far are on 40mm)
One idea I've had is that at the start of a battle a fighter can take an intelligence test to rearrange their equipment from the stash.
Normally, you can only distribute equipment in the post battle step, so switching to a hazard suit to fight Cawdor is impossible, as you couldn't know whether you're fighting Cawdor or Goliaths until the start of the next battle.
But allowing a fighter to rearrange their equipment upon a successful test would allow that - intelligence to correctly estimate what they're going to be fighting next.
This has other uses such as bringing the right concoction of chems for the battle (particularly Escher), or breaking out the respirators, or whatever.
I like the idea. It may lengthen the pre-battle sequence a bit but it's worth play-testing at the very least. How useful it is depends a lot on whether we keep things like multiple loadouts, sticky-hands rule and random selection in the game though.
I'd remove Standing and Prone alltogether. Active, Engaged, Pinned, Seriously injured are all different enough to avoid confusion. So a Chem-synth would become "Active or Engaged fighter."Fighter Statuses (RB pg 50)
This bit can be massively improved just by making all the statuses concrete game terms. STANDING is a primary status that includes ACTIVE and ENGAGED (and possible 'engaging' depending on how the versatile discussion pans out). Prone is a primary status that includes Pinned and Seriously Injured. So the wording on Chem-Synth, as an example, goes from "a Standing and Active or Standing and Engaged fighter" to "a Standing fighter". It's a simple, efficient change.
Not sure about the risk of having a document completely open? Anyone can delete everything or corrupt existing suggestions.
It could be a temporary open document for each separated thread. Worst case scenario, just delete it and compile suggestions from the thread.Not sure about the risk of having a document completely open? Anyone can delete everything or corrupt existing suggestions.
Close combat is deadly. Pinning to prevent CC is a key part of gameplay. So whilst looking at options I think we should tread lightly. I would be happy with a basic grapple or engage action. D3 or M or D3+1, whatever the charge movement bonus is that enables an engage but key point is it doesn't grant a bonus fight action or +1A.
So if pinned you can stand up and engage, lock someone down. Or if left close by a CC it enables an assist. The downside is if CC target is readied you are unlikely to get first attack. This seems a fair balance to me.
Reposting here as I am still getting up to speed with thread structure.It seems perfectly balanced to me. It can be countered in so many ways. Move to engage breaks nothing in this game (IMO). However, this topic is related to the 1" rule and belongs in "general principles" discussion.