
Advanced Search

Author:
Artist:
Price:	$to $

Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay: Imperium Maledictum Core Rulebook

Quick Preview

Full‑size Preview

Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay: Imperium Maledictum Core Rulebook

From

Cubicle 7 Entertainment Ltd.

ADD TO WISHLIST >

Watermarked PDF

$29.99

Imperium Maledictum is a new Warhammer 40,000 roleplaying game set in the glorious Macharian Sector, a sector forged in blood and fire from the thousand worlds conquered by Lord Solar Macharius. It is a sector rife with peril and treachery,

Imperium Maledictum uses a familiar but refined d100 system to draw players into tales of intrigue, betrayal, and conspiracy. Players take on the role of Imperial adepts and citizens recruited by a powerful Patron. These influential figures use teams outside the usual chain of command to undertake grim and perilous missions, furthering their often inscrutable interests. To succeed, players must weave their way through the complicated web of competing factions that make up the Imperium. They must navigate a realm where a whispered accusation can be as deadly as any bolter, plumbing the depths of the most lethal hives and navigating the often far more insidious threats that grace the courts of the highborn.

Do you have what it takes to survive the grim and treacherous adventures in the 41st Millennium?

Cubicle 7 Entertainment Ltd.© Copyright Games Workshop Limited 2023

Customers Who Bought this Title also Purchased

Reviews (6)

Discussions (57)

Please log in to add or reply to comments.

Tony M June 08, 2023 1:04 pm UTC

The errata continues unabated I see. I hope you'll all getting medals, or better still, paid.

Bryan R June 03, 2023 12:58 am UTC

PURCHASER

Resolve
On pp 196, left column, last paragraph it says "If, during combat, the Party's total Superiority is greater than the Resolve of their enemies..."
On pp 197, right column, second paragraph it says " If the party has Superiority equal to or greater than a character's Resolve..."
Should it be "greater than" or "equal to or greater than?"
In the first example given the Party's Superiority of 2 is equal to the gang's Resolve of 2 and it doesn't mention Desperation, but the point of this example was tracking how Superiority changes.
In the second example the Party's Superiority gets to 3 and it states "The GM realises that this beats the Ganger's Resolve of 2." So this suggests that it's "greater than" rather than "equal to or greater than."
It also doesn't state at what point the comparison between Superiority and Resolve should be made to see if the enemy become Desperate. At the very instant it happens?...See more

Jason D June 01, 2023 9:37 pm UTC

PURCHASER

Critical Hit question for anyone that might be able to help ..

Let's say I make a melee attack and get a +1 SL and Crit. Great. Now they defend and get +2 SL. My overall SL is -1. Typically that would miss.

But since I rolled a Critical I hit. If you look further one, when determining what Critical you get, it states, "After taking a Critical Hit, roll 1d10 to determine the Hit Location, then deal Damage from the attack as normal."

Well, I don't usually do damage at all. Do I just roll d10 on the Critical Chart for that Hit Location and do no Wound damage, or do I do damage with an SL -1?
Posted this a couple places

Malkav A June 02, 2023 3:39 am UTC

PURCHASER

I think the clause "then deal Damage from the attack as normal" implies "follow standard rules for dealing Damage", and thus provides the answer you're looking. I'll provide a further explanation for future readers who might also have this same question and desire an in-depth explanation (though I'm sure, based on your post, you were already following the same line of reasoning).

For your example, let's assume you rolled a 33 (skill 43) and your opponent rolled a 20 (skill 40). There are three things we need to ask ourselves:

* Does this attack count as a Critical or a Fumble?
* Is this attack successful?
* What damage is dealt?

Let's address the first part. As of the latest version of the PDF: "When you roll doubles on an attack with positive SL, you score a Critical. This happens even if the roll was opposed and your opponent scored more SL than you." So, you absolutely perform a Critical Hit (i.e. roll on the Critical Wounds...See more

Malkav A May 31, 2023 1:11 am UTC

PURCHASER

Here lies another round of in-depth proof-reading. These are errors and comments located in the EQUIPMENT and PSYCHIC POWERS Chapters (didn't quite make it to the RULES Chapter tonight):

* Several misspellings of the word "augmetics" as "agumetics" (p. 112, 118, 153)
* Sentence in AVAILABILITY section refers to Agri Worlds as "Reclaimed Worlds" for some reason? (p. 120)
* Typo in BURST Weapon Trait ("chose" instead of "choose") (p. 124)
* Under MUNDANE WEAPONS in MELEE table, Great Weapon and Flail are identical, save for price and availability (p. 128)
* Under MUNDANE WEAPONS in MELEE table, Axe and Sword are identical, save for price (p. 128)
* LAS WEAPONS section lists "Laslock" as an example, yet no such weapon exists in the book (p. 129)
* Under LAS WEAPONS in RANGED table, the much costlier Las Carbine is inferior to the Lasgun in nearly every way (p. 132)
* Under SOLID PROJECTILE WEAPONS in...See more

Cubicle 7 E June 06, 2023 8:58 am UTC

PUBLISHER

Hi,

Thank you so much for the feedback, we will get these amended. One of the team has emailed you directly, so be sure to check your inbox!

All the best

Malkav A May 30, 2023 3:51 am UTC

PURCHASER

A closer, more granular search--going from the beginning of the rulebook to the start of the EQUIPMENT chapter--revealed the following errors I'd missed during my previous skimming:

* VOIDSHIP Patron Boon has inconsistent text between Imperial Navy, Rogue Trader, and General descriptions p. 23, 26, 36)
* VOIDSMAN TRAINING FACILITY text has typo ("Rangeed") (p. 36)
* VOIDPORT PEERAGE Patron Boon has inconsistent text between Imperial Navy and General descriptions (p. 23, 36)
* CRAVEN Patron Liability has a nonsensical / incomplete first sentence (p. 37)
* MISERLY has a single / plural mismatch (the plural "resources" are referred to as the singular "it") (p. 39)
* OBSOLETE OBSERVER Patron Liability has contradictory text ("servitor", then "servitor or servoskull") (p. 39)
* PARANOID Patron Liability has a spelling inconsistency ("despatching" vs "dispatching") (p. 40)
* A rogue inconsistent...See more

Runar M May 29, 2023 11:56 am UTC

PURCHASER

@publishers: Can you please look into the issue of the Poisoned Condition and how it is only debilitating, but does not cause any actual damage and is not in any way lethal? This seems wrong, especially in the context of the Needle Pistol/Rifle and their nature as assassination weapons.

Alexandre S May 27, 2023 3:25 pm UTC

PURCHASER

Another bug:

no description for Regicide Set in equipment section.

Alexandre S May 27, 2023 12:29 pm UTC

PURCHASER

I think there is a bug in Feral World origin:

Description says "...produce remarkably strong willed and capable warrior...",

but a Feral World PC cannot buy +5 Wil bonus.

Daniel Enoch T May 25, 2023 8:48 pm UTC

Publishers. 2x questions. What was changed in the last May 19, 2023? Will these monthly updates be incorporated in the the final print version? IE are you gonna get these corrected in pre-print files prior to the printing of the core?

Daniel Enoch T May 26, 2023 12:47 am UTC

TIA BTW.

Mario C May 23, 2023 7:09 am UTC

Ok ive never played any of the previous wh40k rpgs before but the concept here appeals to me (it has kind of a neovictorian cyberpunk vibe to it.) How difficult is the system to learn from both a player and gm's perspective. I understand that its a d100 based mechanic but thats about it.

Jay W May 23, 2023 12:03 pm UTC

PURCHASER

The system itself is a mix of a very simple core mechanic along with several subsystems (none of which are terribly complex individually, but taken together add considerable bulk to the rules). However, there is a lot of minutiae in the record-keeping of this game that I feel could push casual players away.

Bryan R May 22, 2023 10:29 pm UTC

PURCHASER

The maths for ranged attacks doesn't seem to work - if i'm understanding it correctly.
Assume the simplest situation: an attacker with BS 30 shoots a target with Reflex 40. The attacker has a 30% chance to hit and do up to +3 damage.
If the target dodges and it becomes an opposed roll, the attacker now has a ~33% chance to hit and do up to +9 damage, due to opposed roles going off difference in SL only. The attacker will still hit with (for example) a roll if 60 if the target rolls 80 or more: -3SL vs -4 SL. And if the attacker rolls 01 for +3SL and the target rolls 90 for -5SL the attack does +9 damage.
Of course there are criticals and fumbles and modifiers and situations that grant advantage and disadvantage and add or subtract SL. But at its core the maths makes dodging a worse option even in some cases where your Reflex is higher than the BS.
I can see one reason why they may have built opposed rolls like this: it means you don't have to decide what happens in opposed tests where both...See more

Bryan R May 23, 2023 12:11 am UTC

PURCHASER

Actually, I think I did get the maths wrong. The chance of the attacker with BS 30 hitting the target with Reflex 40 is ~36%

Here's the calculation. Basically the target must get at least one SL less than the attacker. So if the attacker gets +3SL the target must get +2SL or worse, if the attacker gets +2SL the target must get +1SL or worse, etc.

BS 30 Reflex 40
01 to 09 20 to 100 729
10 to 19 30 to 100 710
20 to 29 40 to 100 610
30 to 39 50 to 100 510
40 to 49 60 to 100 410
50 to 59 70 to 100 310
60 to 69 80 to 100 210
70 to 79 90 to 100 110
80 to 89 100 10

3609

So 36.09%

Simon K May 29, 2023 4:11 pm UTC

PURCHASER

It's not an opposed roll in that sense.

On a BS roll, the SL potentially increases the damage. The Dodge roll SL potentially reduces that extra damage, or negates the attack entirely.
Page 212, right column, 2nd paragraph:
"When you Dodge a Ranged Attack, make a Reflexes (Dodge) Test. If you are successful, reduce the SL of the Ranged Attack Test against you by the number of SL you achieved. If this would reduce the SL of the Ranged Attack Test to +0 or less, the attack misses you entirely."

Simon K May 29, 2023 4:55 pm UTC

PURCHASER

Although now I look at them, the rules for Blast weapons (e.g. grenades) DO turn it into an Opposed Test which introduces the problem of Dodge rolls increasing potential damage. It also isn't clear how you're supposed to determine damage if the target doesn't or can't dodge (e.g. they've already used their reaction that round).

"All characters in the target Zone can use their Reaction to make an opposed Reflexes (Dodge) Test versus the result of your Test. If you win the Opposed Test, you deal Damage equal to your weapon Damage plus the difference in SL. This means that some characters in the target Zone may take severe damage, while others take none at all."

Unless I see a better solution or it's clarified in the rules, I think I'm just going to allow Dodge tests to reduce blast weapon damage by the SL of the Dodge roll.

Malkav A May 22, 2023 6:17 pm UTC

PURCHASER

This latest update remedies a great number of typographical errors, balance issues, and rules inconsistencies. As a result of the numerous improvements--not least of which is the generous addition of helpful Marginals where there was previously only empty space--the book appears much more polished. I'm genuinely relieved to see how thoroughly the development team has revamped the core book, even fixing issues that I hadn't publicly listed here or elsewhere. After scanning the majority of the PDF, I've so far only come across the following issues:

* Two references to "Endurance (Pain)" when the Skill + Specialisation combo should be "Fortitude (Pain)"
* Three instances of the word "wield" being misspelled as "weild"
* The PROMOTIONS section of the Bestiary using the word "Skill" instead of "Skills" to reference multiple Skills (p. 318)
* The Aim Action inherently removes Disadvantage from the Target a Location Action,...See more

Malkav A May 22, 2023 9:09 pm UTC

PURCHASER

Late Edit: The identified issue with Mesh armour should really be more of a suggestion, rather than an actual issue. It's probably more of a problem with granularity than of any true imbalance / inconsistency. Although the current stats for Mesh armours indicate they aren't meaningfully lighter than many Flak armours, they do provide more protection for the same amount of encumbrance.

Jay W May 21, 2023 2:56 pm UTC

PURCHASER

For anyone wondering about the new update:

"An updated version of this title is now available.

Multiple updates, including fixed typos, an Index, and rules clarifications throughout."

Maximilian K May 21, 2023 12:47 am UTC

PURCHASER

I found an odd error. Apparently all Character sheet PDFs seam to have no dedicated space for the Solars to put. They are on the Sheets in the book but are missing in the separate PDFs.

Colm O May 17, 2023 3:29 pm UTC

PURCHASER

Is the next errata update nearly complete? Bit worried that we'll only get one before the physical release, doesn't leave much time to resolve anything that got missed.