> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.adventurousdadanddaughters.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Necromunda Roleplay’s cancellation: a theory - URL: https://www.adventurousdadanddaughters.com/necromunda-roleplays-cancellation-a-theory/ - Published: 2026-10-26T09:49:06.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-26T10:03:47.000Z - Description: We don't know why GW killed this product before release. But a picture is emerging… - Author: Dad - Tags: Games Workshop, Necromunda, RPGs Well, boo. One of the things [we were most looking forward to](https://www.adventurousdadanddaughters.com/the-most-exciting-news-from-the-warhammer-autumn-preview/) from the Big Autumn Preview is officially dead. *Necromunda Roleplay* will not be launched. Its death was marked by two sentences in [a *Warhammer Community* post](https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/ntkfvqdt/new-for-necromunda-in-2027/?ref=adventurousdadanddaughters.com): > However, there won’t be a Roleplay expansion. > After careful consideration we’ve decided to focus our efforts on providing even more great minis for the core game. Many suspected it was coming. All references to it were removed from the website. The event video was edited to remove the Necromunda Roleplay section. Something was clearly afoot, and some early rumours suggested some form of legal issue. While plenty of people were disappointed by the news of the cancellation, few were surprised. The pattern was clear. But, beyond the rumours, we know very little about what’s occurred, and why. But I have a theory, that matches the few facts we know and the most persistent rumours. ## What the rumours say Here’s the most persistent rumours: - It was something to do with their licence to Cubicle 7 for RPGs - It was a board-level decision - There may have been a single person who drove the shift To balance that, we know that Cubicle 7 have denied ever having a licence for *Necromunda*. Is there a theory that could connect all these? Yes. As the *Necromunda* team was developing the new edition, they came up with the Skirmish/Roleplay split. It looked like a great way of increasing the game’s reach while selling more minis. They checked with the lawyers, and Cubicle 7 hadn’t licensed the game for RPGs. The legal all-clear was there, so they went ahead. Internal approval was maintained as they worked through the process, and design, production and manufacturing goes ahead. Distribution is booked. The time has come: they announce it on the Autumn Preview show. Response is largely positive, but a consistent question online is: “What about Cubicle 7?” ## The PR shock moment And somebody on the board sees that. Somebody who might not have been paying a great deal of attention to the details of a new edition of a minor game, because it’s not their job as a board member. Watching overall strategy *is*. They don’t care much about an individual product, but they do care *deeply* about GW’s relationship with its licensees. And, from the outside, this looks awfully like GW launching a product in direct competition to one of their licensees. Now, I doubt they’re worried too much about Cubicle 7: they’re a [small but passionate outfit](https://cubicle7games.com/en%5FGB/warhammer-the-old-world?ref=adventurousdadanddaughters.com), who would be unlikely to get into serious legals with the owner of some of their biggest IPs. But the perception out in the corporate marketplace that GW might compete with its licensees? Now, that’s a problem. Games Workshop has been clear about how important things like computer games – *Space Marine II* in particular *–* to the company’s revenue. Oh, not necessarily in direct licensing revenue, although that’s nice, but in driving people into the shops and into the core of the hobby. ## Games Workshop’s licensing aspirations From their [most recent annual report](https://assets.ctfassets.net/ost7hseic9hc/6nI9MLA7hoRBfs2OA1oE5R/5b0fef99d81995ba1cdf872887f6cbe6/Results%5FStatement%5F2025-26%5FFINAL%5Fv2.pdf?ref=adventurousdadanddaughters.com): > Our strategy is to exploit the value of our IP beyond our core tabletop business, in multiple categories and markets globally. We intend to ensure Warhammer’s place as one of the top fantasy IPs globally. And also: > The priority remains the same - to deliver on our strategy by licensing our IP to partners who will launch successful video games, live action or animation shows. In the short term the priority is to fully support our existing partners, the work needed to deliver our media deal with Amazon and to sign a few significant licensing deals. And finally: > Licensing - we grant licences to a number of carefully chosen partners. This allows us to exploit our IP to broaden the presence and brand exposure of Warhammer around the world, often entering new markets such as media and entertainment. It also allows us to generate additional income. We endeavour to place the right licence with the right licensee, i.e. one capable of delivering high quality products to Warhammer fans, *in areas we don’t make ourselves*. Emphasis mine. This product both: - Goes against their stated strategy – very much the board’s territory - Makes GW look like a less reliable licensing partner 85% of GW’s licensing revenue is from PC and console games — so the strategic perception is the issue here, not a clash with the (comparatively tiny) RPG licensing volumes. That’s a board-level issue, and a new product that risks harming their licensing ambitions suddenly becomes a big problem. We can imagine our worried board member taking it to the rest of the board. And then all the behaviour we’ve seen since then flows naturally. The brakes are put on the project, while the board discuss. References to the product start being scrubbed from their online presence. The board votes, and the product is killed – possibly by a single vote. ## The motive revealed *Necromunda Roleplay* wasn’t killed for Cubicle 7, or due to an AI-use concern, or because it was “hidden” from the board (other pieces of speculation out there). It was killed to preserve Games Workshop’s image as a good licensing partner. And that would be worth eating the sunk costs they’d already put into the game, at least some of which they can recoup through selling the minis separately. That’s my theory. What do you think?