Small Change to Redemptionist rules

[Caelwyn]

You do have some very good points but I fail to see where they are broken? Yes they have a steadier income but are limited to what they can spend it on, preventing them from diverging from 1 or 2 different tactics.

As for Devotees I think it is implied that they are Juves, some cost, exp leadership etc. Also the fluff describes them as civillians not gangfighters, personally I think it's unfair to treat them as anything but juves as I believe they were written that way to be the drawback to a large horde.

Plus the bigger the Crusade becomes the worse their chances of winning a game become. Having three of your poor men beaten to a pulp in a raid by enforcers every time you play is upsetting.

A gaming group with an enforcer gang would require a change of playing styles. Yes, but that is usually something you know before you make the gang. Technically speaking, they're also not official yet.

As to limiting their tactics, you don't have to spend all your money on recruits, that's just the easiest way to keep the ball rolling. You increase it to a level you are comfortable winning with, then you equip your guys better. You don't have to max out on numbers, the point is merely to show that once you start the ball rolling the opponent really has no way to stop it. The longer the campaign, the stronger a redemptionist gang will get (comparatively speaking).

As to whether or not they are juves...Are scavvies juves? When do they become "gangers"? Are deacons "heavies" because of their xp and greater weapon access? These are things that should be spelled out and aren't, resulting in ambiguity and personal interpretation. In some cases it is relatively easy to interpret, in others it isn't. The general rule of thumb for games, though, is that unless it specifically states something is a particular way then it generally isn't.

[Mastermime]

Sorry what I meant to say was the bigger the gang the less likley you are to pick the scenario and therefore getting creamed.

Devotees cannot get Exterminators as they do not have access to the Grenades and shells list where the Exterminator is located.

I play a split gang of 1 Zealot with an Eviscerator, 1 Priest with a Cs AP and Ex, 5 Crusaders with Shotguns and exterminators and 9 Devotees with Aps. I turn the Shotgunners into Marksmen with Bolt Rounds and have them follow the Devotees and Priest into combat. That is when I pick the scenario, now I am a victim of my own sucess and often get my gang destroyed piecemeal in raids and hit and runs.

There is something to be said for a heavy with a plasma cannon setting up 8" away from you.

The income is supposed to average out to 35 to 40 creds a game so puts them on a par with an average house gang in terms of income.

As for Devotees I really do think that they should be played as Juves and that anyone else who doesn't is cheating pure and simple. If it looks like a Juve and smells like a juve and cannot have basic weapons like a juve then I guess it's a juve. Suddenly the massive Mobs don't look so scary do they?

And I can tell you from experience Exterminators might be a good deterrent but in reality they aren't that great. They blow up easily and 3+ to wound fails 1in3 times plus you rob your own models of XP if you wound more than 1 model in a blast.

I fail to see why people gripe about playing against them, I would rather face a Redemtionist mob than a half decent Van Saar Gang any day of the week.

[Mask]

Sorry what I meant to say was the bigger the gang the less likley you are to pick the scenario and therefore getting creamed.

Well, no, the bigger the gang rating the lower the chance. Big diffrence. Y'see, one of the main reasons the big-gang approach is so good is that a CC-oriented gang can bring alot of models for a lot less of the gang rating. You've mentioned Plasma Cannons. I currently have a heavy with one of those. He, the plasmacannon and a backup autogun totals in at a gang rating of 425+D6, starting out. For that you can get ten juves with autopistols. Or for gangers with chainswords. I'm not saying that the Plasmacannon doesn't have it's place, but when it comes to gang rating, more guys != higher gang rating.

Devotees cannot get Exterminators as they do not have access to the Grenades and shells list where the Exterminator is located.

Ah, my bad. So you're limited to "just" having less than ten cheaper versions of the hand flamer, which in itself is a horror.

There is something to be said for a heavy with a plasma cannon setting up 8" away from you.

"Overkill"? or "Why on earth is he so close with a 72" weapon?"

The income is supposed to average out to 35 to 40 creds a game so puts them on a par with an average house gang in terms of income.

Oh, yes. The only diffrence is that while normal gang start out at an average of 35 or 40 creds from their territories, most of the time the only way they go from there is down as the gang grows.

And I can tell you from experience Exterminators might be a good deterrent but in reality they aren't that great. They blow up easily and 3+ to wound fails 1in3 times plus you rob your own models of XP if you wound more than 1 model in a blast.

The mean thing about the hand flamer isn't that it's a phenomenal killer. It's that it does the job of a 70 point flamer while counting as a pistol, with all that this implies, för 25 points. 15 in case of exterminators. And the point of a flamer isn't just to kill people, it's to automatically pin multiple models with one shot that doesn't need to roll to hit. And fails 1/3 times? Compare to an autopistol which costs the same and fails 7/12 times, only gets to shoot at one model and doesn't ignore cover. That's what other gangs have available for close-quarter shooting.

Really, though, as I said, I suspect that the metagame might work very diffrently in your group compared to mine. Over here everybody (including the Redemptionst player) just agreed that the redemptionist rules weren't balanced enough to have in a campaign and decided to simply let people play Cawdor if they wanted fanatics.

[Caelwyn]

Sorry what I meant to say was the bigger the gang the less likley you are to pick the scenario and therefore getting creamed.

Depends, by the time your GR is that high most of your guys should have advanced, gotten skill ups. Its all subjective after the start.

I play a split gang of 1 Zealot with an Eviscerator, 1 Priest with a Cs AP and Ex, 5 Crusaders with Shotguns and exterminators and 9 Devotees with Aps. I turn the Shotgunners into Marksmen with Bolt Rounds and have them follow the Devotees and Priest into combat. That is when I pick the scenario, now I am a victim of my own sucess and often get my gang destroyed piecemeal in raids and hit and runs.

Now I know we play different styles. That many shotguns? *shudder*

There is something to be said for a heavy with a plasma cannon setting up 8" away from you.

That he's going to get charged?

The income is supposed to average out to 35 to 40 creds a game so puts them on a par with an average house gang in terms of income.

And that works, right up until they start adding members to their starting gang.

As for Devotees I really do think that they should be played as Juves and that anyone else who doesn't is cheating pure and simple. If it looks like a Juve and smells like a juve and cannot have basic weapons like a juve then I guess it's a juve. Suddenly the massive Mobs don't look so scary do they?

I'm not arguing that its right, i'm arguing what the rules state. They're not cheating, because the rules don't say they're juves. Pure and simple. If the rules do not say something, it is not so. It makes an extremely minor difference in my game play. Besides, as i pointed out before, I don't keep mobs close together. It makes them template bait and regardless of whether they're juves or not their leadership means they break.

I fail to see why people gripe about playing against them, I would rather face a Redemtionist mob than a half decent Van Saar Gang any day of the week.

Are you comparing a starting Redemptionist mob to an experienced Van Saar gang? Because going from basic stats I will bet on the 19 member Redemptionist mob over the 7 member with heavy plasma gun kind of gang you've been talking about. At this point I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.


Edit: Note also, that while their average incomes may be similar any additional income the Redemptionists earn is not washed through the income chart IIRC. That is quite a large advantage. I would definitely be picking scavengers as often as possible. Not only because it gets extra income but because it forces my opponent to move from a static position in order to either gain money for himself or prevent me from getting it.

On top of this they get the rules for redeeming and inspiring, not something to be sneered at.

[fen]

Plus the bigger the Crusade becomes the worse their chances of winning a game become. Having three of your poor men beaten to a pulp in a raid by enforcers every time you play is upsetting.

Seriously, the larger they become the less chance they have of winning?  When I read things like that I'm tempted to use hyperbole and ask if you're even playing Necromunda, because numbers win out in skirmish games more often then they don't.  Raids are also not worth using as an example, small elite units dominate in raids - that's great, it should be that way as a slight balance against the horde style of play.

Caelwyn is describing a tried and true tactic for dominating Necromunda campaigns, horde-style Crusades generate a lot of money compared to most and still have access to some of the best equipment even with their limited lists, so they do just fine.  A while back on the old boards (and on Eastern Fringe) I ran the maths for how a Crusade operates and given average circumstances they become dominating after just a handful of games.  I even went the whole hog and took a Crusade armed with knives (apart from a few key Crusaders and a Priest who provided cover fire) and what happened later was so disgusting we threw the Redemptionist rules out of the window and used Ant's house rules instead.

Frankly, the Redemptionist rules need burning to the ground and reworking from scratch and Necromunda needs hard gang size caps like Mordhiem has.

[Mastermime]

Fen I don't think the rules are quite as bad as you say, but yes a cap may be needed for them in the long run.

As for what you all say about do I actually play Necromunda? Yes and I have since the games inception way back when. And I do agree that the Redemptionist Rules do need a rework of some kind but they are no worse than they used to be.

In the long run I still feel that the House Gangs (with the probable exception of Goliath) still have far more of an advantage over the Outlanders. The simple fact that Redemptionists have a steady income is not in my mind greater than the fact that an Escher Gang can start with swords. Or that Van Saar can simply Ignore the Ammo Rules after a half dozen games.

However I feel that I will not win this argument so will bow out gracefully and defer.

I will say one final thing however, instead of nerfing the Reddemptionists why not simply work your Gang in the band lower on the Income chart?

[Caelwyn]

Fen I don't think the rules are quite as bad as you say, but yes a cap may be needed for them in the long run.

As for what you all say about do I actually play Necromunda? Yes and I have since the games inception way back when. And I do agree that the Redemptionist Rules do need a rework of some kind but they are no worse than they used to be.

I think it's just a case of hyperbole. We're not saying you don't play Necromunda, but that your experiences with it are far from ours. You must have a much less rules-lawyer-y kind of group. In mine, if someone spotted something abusable like this. They would run with it for all it's worth. And pick caravan lots.

In the long run I still feel that the House Gangs (with the probable exception of Goliath) still have far more of an advantage over the Outlanders. The simple fact that Redemptionists have a steady income is not in my mind greater than the fact that an Escher Gang can start with swords. Or that Van Saar can simply Ignore the Ammo Rules after a half dozen games.

However I feel that I will not win this argument so will bow out gracefully and defer.

I will say one final thing however, instead of nerfing the Reddemptionists why not simply work your Gang in the band lower on the Income chart?

The thing is, its not going to be just one gang that needs to adjusting in order to catch up. Its going to be every other gang in the campaign. The different bonuses (like resilient or mutations) that outlanders get are hard to quantify compared to the bonuses that house gangs get and they're going to affect different groups in different ways. Don't feel like you have to censor any more of your opinions just because we disagree. Although I do agree that there's not really much further we can go with this argument. We've both presented our views on why we feel this is or isn't broken. Its not one thing making it broken, its a combination of little things. Money based on the number of guys you have, no gang limit, no income washing, 50% free replacement for dead guys. With other advantages thrown in.