Quote from: Panzerkraken;726321The Rogue Trader edition of WH:40k (2nd?) felt a lot like this.  There was a significant push in sections for players to have their specific personalities playing through scenarios with short range tactical goals.

I'm pretty sure Rogue Trader(the Original) was 1'st edition WH40K.

Was just looking at the new Judge Dredd miniatures game which seem to have many of the aspects of Necromunda: character advancement, money used to buy goods, random scenarios. I actually prefer the simplified combat systems from these games to 90% of RPG combat. The combat system from WFB (to hit based on skill, separate armor saves) is so much better than the one from WFRP that it drives me crazy. Even supposedly rules-light RPGs tend to way over complicate combat.

Quote from: Arkansan;726316Speaking of that any one ever run the rpg system in WFB 1st?

I've never played the WFB v1 rpg rules but I do remember looking it over and feeling that large portions of it were incomplete especially regarding how magic users work.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;726136What I'm wondering is (outside of my own limited experiences) how satisfying are games like this in the long term? What advantages and disadvantages do they have over true RPGs?

Never played Necromunda, but we had a Blood Bowl league and a Star Fleet Battles roster going when I was in the Navy. Neither were RPGs, but they were fun for quite awhile as long as you had different teams and factions coming in for games.

The big advantage and disadvantage to this was that every game had to be self-contained so that while you could continue on, you didn't necessarily have to. There were some long stretches between games because of ship deployment, so it could be months or in one memorable case a year and a half between Blood Bowl teams or SFB squadrons being used.

I love Necromunda, especially from my brief play time, but particularly in theory. See, I love turn based strat/tactics games like Shining Force, Langrisser, Battle for Westnoth, etc. And I also understand that, though the engine predominantly focuses on TBS combat, you can completely add all that exploration and social interaction you want from an RPG. But I also understood that it could be a combat time sink if needlessly complicated.

So in theory I should have been one of the biggest 4e supporters around. It should scratch all my itches -- except the execution falls into the complexity trap: too-long combats, poor exploration and social interaction integration, overly complex and integrated mechanics, low flexibility engine, etc. I'm now dancing with the idea (since I don't own a copy of Necromunda myself, nor have it as high priority on my used games search) with looking at Warmachine and character development, or maybe check out Malefeux.

For me the current big goals to work on is: KISS combat mechanics, placement issues during explore and social scenes, and how to maintain fog of war. Shining Force is my touchstone for KISS mechanics, a basic attack, a base range, and resource pools hovering close to single digits. Placement issues bugs because I don't want to bog exploration and social with elaborate movement and line of sight rules. Fog of war doesn't bother me as much because I have more than one technique bouncing in my head to deal with that.

Oh, I know it won't be as freeform as an RPG; structure necessitates boundaries, so more structure, more boundaries. But I also now know that what I am trying to achieve is very borderline from the broad RPG experience, too. So what I seek is a niche of a niche of a niche, and well, that makes the pool of interested players/victims for my ideas small indeed.

I love THW stuff. I have 5150 and the chain reaction system really floats my boat.

Having stats and a continued campaign for characters in it? Not so much. The same way I never really worried about mech pilot stats in Battletech beyond what is absolutely necessary.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;726136First, forgive me if I use terms inaccurately, this isn't an area of tabletop I've had much experience with.

For those who are unfamiliar, Necromunda was a game by the Games Workshop where each player put together a gang of gunslingers and then competes with others for resources in a dystopian hive-city's lower depths. While the game can be played as one-off clashes, it really shines when you play it in campaign mode, where you have to roll after each clash to see who lives, who dies, who limps away with permanent injuries, who learns new skills, etc. You also get to make choices in hiring new gang members, purchasing equipment (which may or may not be available), and dealing with random events in your gang's territory.

Now this is certainly not an RPG in the conventional sense, as it lacks absolute freedom unless you are willing to negotiate new rules with the other players in the campaign, but there are certainly RPG elements as I understand them.

What I'm wondering is (outside of my own limited experiences) how satisfying are games like this in the long term? What advantages and disadvantages do they have over true RPGs?

It's called a "wargame campaign," and people have been doing them for decades and they're wonderful fun.

My FIRST one was as part of a US armor division that went from landing on Omaha Beach to hitting the Rhine.

* reads rest of thread *

Crom's hairy nutsack, are people really that fucking ignorant about wargames?

I'd say not exactly scratch the RPG itch, but I think games like Necromunda are way more fun approached from the RPG side as opposed to the strictly gaming side.  Dogface charging Korbitz the Mutilator because he capped Jonny Darkside back when him and Dogface were just Juves coming up together is good stuff.  Having a Juve eventually make it to being Leader of a gang gives the game a great immersive context.

I suggest going and getting all the expanded rules from the magazines.  Crazy good fun, but not if you're expecting a balanced wargame.

Quote from: Old Geezer;726391* reads rest of thread *

Crom's hairy nutsack, are people really that fucking ignorant about wargames?

Yes.

Quote from: Old Geezer;726390It's called a "wargame campaign," and people have been doing them for decades and they're wonderful fun.

My FIRST one was as part of a US armor division that went from landing on Omaha Beach to hitting the Rhine.

Quote from: Old Geezer;726391* reads rest of thread *

Crom's hairy nutsack, are people really that fucking ignorant about wargames?

Yes.

I think it has to do with todays prevalence of Miniatures gaming. Most Minis gaming has for the most part removed the campaign game aspect of Wargames. Most minis games now are just beating each other up and whoever tables their opponent first is the winner... The grander scale of wargaming is almost non-existant.

Which is sad... Those games like Necromunda, Mordheim, and Gorka-Morka are all but gone now... I don't think I've seen any of the big minis gaming companies even support campaign play anymore...

Personally, I see Minis games and War Games as two distinct genres. But I wish more Minis games would go back to their War Gaming roots IMHO. They've lost a lot over the years...

1st edition Space Hulk and I believe 2nd edition Space Hulk both refer to themselves as "Role Playing Games"; the 3rd edition doesn't.

The Two Hour Wargames I've played mostly was All Things Zombie and it had a pretty good campaign system from what I remember, or at least very usable.  Most of their add ons for ATZ look to be expanding your campaign.

Goalsystem Delves also has a section of the book dedicated to playing an extended campaign. With sections on buying and selling loot, doing holy works, library research, running a criminal enterprise, mercenary work and a few other things.  By no means are these parts rules dense, but they are there.  Also, it's a level based  game, so you have your standard character advancement.  It's a really cool game.

Most of the Minis gamers around here don't play campaigns it's typically just throw some figures on the table and battle it out with no particular rhyme or reason.

Quote from: YourSwordisMine;726406Yes.

I think it has to do with todays prevalence of Miniatures gaming. Most Minis gaming has for the most part removed the campaign game aspect of Wargames. Most minis games now are just beating each other up and whoever tables their opponent first is the winner... The grander scale of wargaming is almost non-existant.

Which is sad... Those games like Necromunda, Mordheim, and Gorka-Morka are all but gone now... I don't think I've seen any of the big minis gaming companies even support campaign play anymore...

Personally, I see Minis games and War Games as two distinct genres. But I wish more Minis games would go back to their War Gaming roots IMHO. They've lost a lot over the years...

That's pretty much what I was talking about regarding Warhammer Fantasy 3rd, which was contemporary of the first Rogue Trader and the last time the game used a GM. GW's Ancient Battles from years back seems to have been the last breath of this system, but even it only had the most basic of campaign rules.

Playing wargames Ive often found that I understand why D&D was originally called a wargame, and I can in retrospect see where RPGs were born.

Ive often wanted to experiment with this edge to see how far a wargame can be pushed until its an RPG.

Quote from: TristramEvans;726421Ive often wanted to experiment with this edge to see how far a wargame can be pushed until its an RPG.

Me too, I think it would be an interesting experiment as well as fun gaming. I have always wanted to do a wargaming campaign with a GM where players also had character generals.