Sunday 11 February 2018

Shadow War: Armageddon - The New Old Necromunda

"the more things change, the more they stay the same," (Alphonse Karr, 1849)
The "new Games Workshop" has returned with lots of new Specialist Games-style offerings.  Too many for me to afford or test, that's for sure.  Whilst the company policy apparently has changed,their pricing certainly hasn't - $70AUD ($55 USD/40 pounds) - for a softcover rulebook when Privateer is moving to free pdfs - I could buy a Malifaux or Warmachine starter box (with rules) for that price.

Since Shadespire is looking more like a CCG/boardgame hybrid than a miniatures game, my hopes of a "New Mordhiem" seem dashed. But what about the new Necromunda

Well, it's out. But paying  $250AUD for the box set...  ...THEN having to folk over another $50 book to play the campaign (wtf?!)... that's the old mercenary GW at it's best.  It's the equivalent of removing a faction in a PC game (like, say, Warhammer: Total War) so you can sell it later as a DLC.
The old Games Workshop style gouging at it's finest.  About to walk away, I paused when I came across a copy of Shadow Wars.

Campaign skirmish in a hive world? ....sounds familiar. 

That's because it is. Shadow War IS the old Necromunda, with standard 40K factions replacing the gangs, and a lot of interesting campaign options trimmed out/dumbed down.  In fact, you can pretty much stop reading now, as that sentence pretty much summed up these rules.

Shadow War is simply the Necromunda rules (now feeling clunky and outdated) rebadged as an expensive softcover.  They kept the worst bit (the rules themselves) whilst removing/simplifying much of the best bit (the campaign system.)  There's probably some subtle differences (I'm sure there's detailed blow by blow details on some 40K fansite somewhere) but from what I can recall, it's the same game. 

For those pining for Necromunda, Shadow Wars allows you to use your 40K models. Sadly, the rules are dated, and the campaign is simple and bland.

The Shiny
It's comparable to a $40 Warmachine softcover, but just $30 more expensive. It's pretty, but somewhat unintuitive to use.  Unlike the New 2017 Necromunda, it has 15 kill teams AND the campaign rules included (like you'd expect) - so there's that, I suppose.

Activation & Stats
Remember this is Necromunda (aka modified 2nd ed), pretty much word for word. So typical IGOUGO (ignoring any advances in the last 20-odd years) - you do everything with all your dudes, before the opponent can respond. And my goodness, the nostalgia - I haven't seen a stat line as long as  this:  M  WS   BS   S   T   W   I    A   Ldr - outside of a RPG, for years.

Remember when charging was a double move, rather than a random dice amount added on?  And - yay - not everyone moves 6"- some factions are faster or slower. Like the old Necromunda, there are rules for climbing, hiding, falling etc - and like the old Necromunda I'll still have to houserule what you can do if halfway up a ladder.

Yup, old-school tables which you need to consult before you can make rolls. And modifiers - lots of modifiers. I'd forgotten just how many. Shooting is very much old-school 40K - but models if hit are automatically pinned. Then there's the roll against toughness. Then a saving throw.  It seems clunky - there's too many steps and modifiers.  Tracking ammo is a pest, as is "flesh wounds"- that is a -1 to BS/WS for the rest of the game. There's good old-school overwatch. Models can usually fire 360d (wasn't the old Necromunda 180? not sure - if so it's the fist change I've noticed). Melee is a different mechanic - roll 1d6 per attack and add the best to the WS. Difference in score is the # of hits scored by the winner. 

Again, a new mechanic (well, the same as the old one, but this is the third or fourth dice rolling mechanic so far - very inconsistent design) - 2d6 and must roll = or under Ldr to maintain nerve.  If a friendly goes down close by, allies test morale to see if they break. Once 25% of the warband is downed or fled, a bottle test is made for the whole gang - if they fail the game ends.

The art and graphics are nice, but the rules are a bit unintuitive - nice to look at, not particularly handy for actually searching for rules...

Warbands & Campaign
You get up to 10 guys, (more if Orks) including a leader and 2-3 specialists.   Different factions get access to different skill trees.  You can use pretty much all the 40K factions - great! This is why I bought the rules - to reinvigorate many 40K dusty 40K models lying dormant since... 5th ed? 

But Shadow Wars is disappointingly streamlined - as there's no XP, territories, or sending guys out to do odd jobs. You can choose between recruitment or new gear; and you can choose exactly what you want - no need to roll for availability etc.  Even serious injuries are simplified to a d6 - I can see a lot of models will end up with Frenzy. You choose exactly which one character to get a new skill/advance each game. Sounds totally not open to being abused.....  Even on the skill rolls, you choose the type of skill and then roll twice on the table, choosing your favourite - so you have a great chance of getting exactly what you want...  No min-maxing opportunities here, no sir. 

So basically, the best part of Necromunda got dumbed down and ever easier to min-max; though it is much less likely you'd get the "snowball" effect where a winning gang becomes an unstoppable juggernaut after a few games. 

Finally, promethium replaces cash (it's kinda a mix of cash+VP) which you can use to win (once you accrue 15) or hire "free agents" to bolster your force. It feels odd.  Also, when replacing losses you can spend up to 100 points on a new recruit; but many troops cost over 100... you can't replace elite troops when you lose them?  Again, feels a bit "off."  The scenarios seem the same as the old Necromunda ones.

While I can finally get some use out of my dusty 40K models again, Shadow War leaves me feeling vaguely cheated. 

Well, you could have stopped when I said "exactly the same as old Necromunda, with 40K instead of gangs, with the campaign dumbed down." The new GW hasn't got better at writing rules, that's for sure - and why would they, when they can lazily rehash the older ones?  Worse yet, they streamlined the wrong thing - keeping old clunky game rules, whilst gutting many characterful campaign mechanics.

+ Does allow you to use 40K models to play a campaign game
- You could probably find fan-made 40K gangs on the net for old Necromunda and have the same experience (example links) if GW hasn't shut them down
- Same chaotic rule writing from original Necromunda; dated rules design
- Overpriced for what it is.
- Campaign overly dumbed down; easier to min-max... (seems more league rules than narrative campaign)
+ .....BUT less likely to get overpowered teams after a few wins
- I have to go looking for funky dice like scatter dice, artillery dice etc
- Quite a lot of token clutter for such a simple/old game
 - It feels like it needs house rules (and after spending $70, I'm resentful) 

Recommended: a guarded and resentful Yes merely as it allows you to re-purpose 40K models in an acceptable skirmish campaign; the small numbers needed to play make it affordable; even if the rulebook is a ripoff. But if you have old Necromunda you could probably find house rules on the net that do the same thing, for free. Worse: instead streamlining and modernizing the games rules themselves, GW mistakenly kept the old ones verbatim, but opted to trim the once characterful campaign system to be rather generic, McDonalds and bland.


  1. "- Same chaotic rule writing from original Necromunda; dated rules

    Does old, dated rules automatically mean bad ones? I'm agree Necromunda (the game, not the campaign) has some overcomplicated and time-wasting systems (I couldn't stop nodding while reading the article), but old and dated rules can give us some new perspectives and ideas about designing. The old for someone could be new for others. IMO, dated doesn't mean a bad thing.

    Other questions, which would be the criteria to define a wargame as a modern one? Should we consider the most actually played (and economically succesful) games as a reference of well-designed modern wargames?

    1. No, dated does not mean bad.

      I meant dated in "lots of stats, many of which are unecessary" "extra needless rolls"(i.e. toughness AND save); too many modifiers (tracking if ran or not last turn = not worth it), use of boring IGOUGO rather than more interactive activation (even alternating single models like 2017 Necromunda does), and use of many different dice mechanics (d6 to beat a score, d6 vs chart, 2d6 etc) instead of a single consistent one. Resolving melee and missile combat in different ways, and clunky morale rules. Unnecessary tracking (flesh wounds, ammo).

      These design elements are all very 1990s.

      That said, I think we've swung to far the other way at times, with far many bland, fast playing rules. No modifiers is also bad = modifiers encourage certain tactics. No stats is also bad; designers compensate with 101 special abilities or traits (see Song of Blades and Heroes). Sometimes games are more like CCGs than wargames (Warmachne, Malifaux) with so many special rules remembering rules is more important than tactics (Infinity).

  2. A fair overview. I suspect GW was testing the waters for the Necromunda re-release.

    1. It's just so lazy. What did they do?

      ....Copy and paste 1990s rules verbatim, meddle needlessly with the best bit (campaign) just to prove it's "new" and then insert 40K as factions (which I could do off one of the Necromunda fan sites).

  3. The reason I built a few of my own games in the first place was I got tired of looking at all of my unused 40K models. I bet several of us on the Google Group have done the same. :)

    Still not enough to get me to buy this or the Newcromunda.... and I played the heck out of the old Necromunda.

  4. --"The reason I built a few of my own games in the first place was I got tired of looking at all of my unused 40K models. I bet several of us on the Google Group have done the same."

    I suspect "making a better 40K" or "improving 40K" was a first step for most game designers. I know I wanted to alternate unit activation and my friends thought it was heresy "it's not OFFICIAL rules, so it's not legit"....

    1. I love alternating activation, and right up untl the Bolt-Action/Antares sytem was my favorite. I like the Order-Dice system as it alternates but unexpected things can happen, with multiple activations in a row. Its a good compromise (downside is list-building just to optimise order dice). Two Fat Lardies have a good system as well, alternating activations with command pools that vary whow much you can accomplish during your go, with the dice chancing a multiple activation - Chain of Command, I believe is the rule-set.