Poll: Is God of War subject to No Retreat when you choose to pass a morale test?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Timmah**

Antonin wrote:Saying that the term "automatic" has to be included by RAW is without basis in the rules - so far, I have seen no reference in the rules that state that the rule has to use specific "magic language" before it applies. The question is whether the effect is automatic, not whether the word automatic appears somewhere in the rule.

Wait isn't this exactly what RAW is. A word has to be in the description for it to be that.

You don't see people making bolters rending because they feel they should be and just because the "magic word" rending isn't in the description doesn't mean they aren't.

**Nurglitch**

That's a question for the Tactics Forum to discuss. In this thread we're discussing whether a model with the God of War rule is subject to No Retreat! when the player chooses to pass the Morale check instead of failing it.

**Flavius Infernus**

Okay I've been thinking about this one (and refraining from commenting) for like three days and here's what I think is happening.

"Automatic" has two meanings in the dictionary.

In one, "automatically" means "without choice." If a person defaults on a loan, the co-signer automatically becomes responsible for it, has no choice.

In the other, "automatically" means "independent of action." An automatic pilot flies the plane "automatically" without any action from the human pilot.

So your answer to this question depends on which definition of "automatically" you are using.

If you read it as meaning "without choice," then a GoW character choosing to pass is not passing automatically because he chose.

If you read it as meaning "without action," then a GoW character choosing to pass is passing automatically--he's choosing to pass automatically.

So it's ambiguous. I don't think the RAW question can be answered with the materials at hand.

**Harkainos**

-deleted-

The precedence that you have to AUTOMATICALLY pass morale in order to be subject to No Retreat! is in plain text in the rulebook.

**don_mondo**

So what we're saying here is that the only units in the game that suffer No Retreat are Marine units that are caught on a Sweeping Advance?

This is due to the "never fall back" clause. Notice that this clause is not conditional or dependent upon a die roll or anything, just says they never fall back. Every unit in the game (including Fearless) can fall back, ergo, every unit in the game fails to meet this one necessary qualification to suffer No Retreat. Space Marines, however, have a clause in their codex (which of course will take precedence over the rulebook) that they suffer No Retreat if caught by a Sweeping Advance.

Pretty silly, ain't it? And yet, by pure RAW, that's the rule. Also silly (IMO, not trying to cast any personal aspersions at anyone) is thinking that being able to pass a test that normally requires a die roll without rolling dice isn't an automatic pass of that test. Besides, the fact he can choose to fail has no bearing or meaning on taht portion of the equation. The rule doesn't ask if you can automatically fail a test, just if you can automatically pass a test. And yes, he can say "I pass" and it is so. No element of chance or it not occuring. Pull out your dictionaries all you want, that is the definition of automatic.

But we're all going to disagree until GW FAQs it, which they probably won't because it's clear to them...............

**Nurglitch**

It's not ambiguous though.

The No Retreat! rule goes to some lengths to define automatically passing the Morale check as being:

1. Immune to Morale checks
2. Automatically pass Morale checks

If to be immune to Morale checks is to be equivalent to automatically passing Morale checks, then "automatically" must be read in the first sense as meaning with choice, since passing a Morale check is an action whether you choose to pass it or you pass it by rolling the dice.

Saying that a model with the God of War special rule is choosing to pass the Morale check automatically is the same as saying that a unit rolling 7 on a Morale check of 8 is passing automatically - true, but not the conditions upon which No Retreat! is applied.

Moreover there are the other two exceptions to the No Retreat rule, such as the fact that No Retreat! only applies to units that will never fall back, and that do not take Morale checks.

No Retreat! applies to units that will never fall back. A model with God of War can, and occasionally will, fall back. No Retreat! does not apply to such a model.

No Retreat! applies to units that do not take Morale checks. A model with God of War does take Morale checks, and only in taking them can decide to pass or fail. No Retreat! does not apply to such a model.

**BBeale**

Harky,

Come on man, of course I've been reading the posts. Just because I choose not to argue this issue on the grounds defined by the Anti-No Retreat crowd doesn't mean I'm incapable of coming to a genuine conclusion.

As pointed out by Yak, the inclusion of "automatic" language in GOW is redundant. Flavius just did a great job of explaining why the ambiguity exists here-without "action" versus without "choice".

Additionally, the Anti-No Retreat crowd is not using the previous ruling on similar rules as precedent. If they were, then the conclusion would be that No Retreat applies. What the Anti-No Retreat crowd is doing is attempting to distinguish GOW from the precedent, which is why we're having all of this discussion about the inclusion of "automatic" language.

Brice

**gaylord500**

don_mondo wrote:This is due to the "never fall back" clause. Notice that this clause is not conditional or dependent upon a die roll or anything, just says they never fall back.

Never fall back when taking a morale check. While it does say never in the second paragraph, you're seeing if they automatically pass their morale checks by the first paragraph part of No Retreat!. So taking both together, you're seeing if they never fall back on their morale checks, not if they never fall back for all time (although I think there might be some units that do that. That's just an aside - they're covered as a subset of these already).

So I believe that's how this applies to Commisars, Tyranids in particular situations, etc. In the times when they can fall back when taking a morale check, the No Retreat! rule does not apply to them either. When they can't, it does. Since God of War'ed units can sometimes fall back, I would say that they do not automatically pass. So this part of the no-NR for God of War/Iron Will view is consistent with the rules and play for the other units you have mentioned.

----

If you want to link to Flavius's argument again BBeale, I'd be happy to try and respond to it. I don't remember what he said specifically, or if it was much different than what the rest of the pro-NR folks have been saying.

**Timmah**

BBeale wrote:Harky,

Come on man, of course I've been reading the posts. Just because I choose not to argue this issue on the grounds defined by the Anti-No Retreat crowd doesn't mean I'm incapable of coming to a genuine conclusion.

As pointed out by Yak, the inclusion of "automatic" language in GOW is redundant. Flavius just did a great job of explaining why the ambiguity exists here-without "action" versus without "choice".

again adding the term automatic to stuff is not redundant as seen in my example below.

Timmah wrote:
"Morale checks are taken by rolling 2d6, if the amount rolled is less than the units leadership then they AUTOMATICALLY pass their check.

I just added the word automatic, which doesn't change anything according to Yakface.

Have fun taking no retreat wounds after any pass.

BBeale wrote:
Additionally, the Anti-No Retreat crowd is not using the previous ruling on similar rules as precedent. If they were, then the conclusion would be that No Retreat applies. What the Anti-No Retreat crowd is doing is attempting to distinguish GOW from the precedent, which is why we're having all of this discussion about the inclusion of "automatic" language.

Brice

Please show me a previous ruling for this.
There has been nothing like this ruled on before. In every other case the "pass" is stated as automatic in its rules.

Until GoW states in its rules IN WRITING that it is automatic there is no way you can argue RAW here.

Because as I stated before you can not claim to know that GW meant for it to be considered an automatic pass.

Once again for GoW to be subject to no retreat you must prove (FIND IN WRITING IN A RULEBOOK) one of the following:

1) GoW states in its entry that it is an automatic pass
2) All morale checks that are passed without dice are considered automatic

Neither of which you can do, as I have stated previously.

**wyomingfox**

Timmah wrote:Ok last post and I'm out of this argument, if people can't accept reason and want to add words to rules fine, play it however you like.

Timmah,

What happened? I thought you were done, instead you keep letting yourself get drawn right back in

**Timmah**

I know, I know. /cry

**wyomingfox**

You can do it Timmah, I believe in you! (It is addictive though)

**Harkainos**

@Bbeale - it only applies because you say it applies.

You are adding the word automatic to fit your own logic.

Adding some words to sentences does change their meaning, just like the lack of some words in sentences change their meaning.

You have to automatically pass a morale test for No Retreat! to apply.

You are under the assumption that if a player chooses the units fate, or didn't roll dice, that the fate is automatic, that isn't true (by definition).

**BBeale**

Timmah,

Re-read Flavius' post above. He does a very good job of explaining why automatic is so contentious in this context. How automatic is applied and whether it is even relevant are very much the issue. It is not the magic bullet that you insist it is. As I've said before, neither side can argue RAW here-this is totally RAI. In some ways, the precedent argument is one of form versus substance.

Your side insists that "automatic" has to be included, my side says look to the result. Regardless, your side is only arguing "automatic" in an attempt to distinguish GOW from the precedent--you're saying previous rulings on similar rules do not apply because they all include the term "automatic" in the definition of the rule. It has been pointed out that this notion is undercut by rulings on Iron Will because it includes "automatic" in a context that doesn't apply to this debate. Furthermore, if "automatic" were inserted into GOW, it would be entirely redundant and would not effect the how the rule works-you would still pass or fail the test per yer choice-but you side insists that the failure to include "automatic" means No Retreat does not apply despite this fact.

Instead of me searching for your shopping list of written rules we both know don't exist, why don't you show us all where the text of GOW states that No Retreat does not apply.

Brice

**Nurglitch**

BBeale:

Nurglitch wrote:So the question is whether a model with the God of War rule is subject to the No Retreat! general rule when the player chooses for that model to pass its Morale Check.

The relevant material appears to be:

God of War, Codex: Space Marines, p.84. wrote:
Marneus Calgar can choose whether to pass or fail any Morale check he is called upon to make. Whilst Calgar is on the table, all units with the Combat Tactics special rue can also choose whether to pass or fail any Morale check they are called upon to take.

No Retreat!, Rulebook, p.44. wrote:
It's not uncommon for units to be immune to Morale checks for losing an assault, or to automatically pass them for some reason (they may have the 'fearless' special rule, be subject to a vow or some other special rule). When such units lose a close combat, they are in danger of being dragged down by the victorious enemy despite their determination to hang on.

These units do not take Morale checks and will never fall back. Instead, these units suffer a number of wounds equal to the number their side has lost the combat by (allocated as normal).

The God of War rule enables Calgar to pass or fail any Morale check he is called upon to make. If he can fail any Morale check he is called upon to make, then he can take Morale checks, and can fall back.

The God of War rule enables Calgar to pass or fail any Morale check he is called upon to make. If he can be called upon to make Morale checks, and fail them, then he is not immune to Morale checks.

The God of War rule enables Calgar to either pass or fail any Morale check he is called upon to make. If he can either pass or fail any Morale check he is called upon to make, then he does not automatically pass Morale checks.

The model did not automatically pass its Morale check.

The model is not immune to Morale checks.

The model will sometimes fall back.

So no, a model with the God of War rule is not subject to No Retreat! when the player chooses for that model to pass its Morale check.

If Calgar is chosen to pass a Morale check he is called upon to make, then he suffers no ill effects, just as if he had passed the Morale check by rolling dice.

If Calgar is chosen to fail a Morale check he is called upon to make, then he Falls Back. What happens next is covered by And They Shall Know No Fear, so if Calgar is caught in the Sweeping Advance he will take No Retreat! wounds.

Truly, a man that can face such impossible odds, refuse to give ground, and survive is a God of War.

**Breton**

And just which previous examples are similar?

Summary Execution? No-
A) No choice involved.
B) Only one possible result

Tyranids in Synapse?
A) No choice involved
B) Only one possible result

Fearless?
A) No choice involved.
B) Only one possible result.

Caught by Sweeping Advance?
A) No Choice Involved
B) Only one possible result

Absolutely gigantic Ork Mob?
A) No choice involved
B) Only one possible result.

I haven't found or been told of a FAQ'ed rule that has:

A) Choice involved
B) More than one possible result

when dealing with morale and No Retreat.

**BBeale**

Come on Nurglitch, you know what point I was trying to make. I'm well aware of how the Anti-No Retreat crowd gets from point A to point B. That's not the issue. The point I was making is that while "automatically" is not expressly included in GOW, neither is immunity to No Retreat--both sides are working with interpretations and intent here. It just happens that in every incident to date where a unit passes a morale check regardless of the dice, GW has ruled that No Retreat applies.

Brice

**Breton**

How about you finish that sentence then? In every case where a unit passes a morale check without rolling the dice, as its only option, they've been subject to No Retreat.

**BBeale**

Breton,

Choice is not the issue. The issue is whether or not by making the choice the outcome is automatic. One side says yes, the other says no. No Retreat is only concerned with how a unit passes a Morale Check. The majority here, and precedent agree that if a unit passes the check without having to roll (or in some cases re-roll), the result of passing is automatic and No Retreat applies.

Brice

**Black Blow Fly**

None of the anti-Marine crowd has been able to influence me to change my original opinion.

G

**Nurglitch**

BBeale:

Yes, and I was showing that your point is wrong, because in getting from the rules to their correct application, God of War explicitly exempts Marneus Calgar from suffering No Retreat! if he chooses to pass the Morale check.

1. The rules explicitly mention that God of War takes effect when he makes a Morale check. Units affected by No Retreat! do not make Morale checks.

2. The rules explicitly mention that God of War allows a unit to fail a Morale check and thus Fall Back. Units affected by No Retreat! never Fall Back.

3. The rules explicitly mention that God of War requires that a player make a choice between passing and failing a Morale check, rather than automatically defaulting to a pass.

But, as I keep pointing out, God of War does not make Marneus Calgar immune to No Retreat! because, like all models with And They Shall Know No Fear he will suffer No Retreat! if caught in a Sweeping Advance.

**Breton**

BBeale wrote:Breton,

and precedent agree that if a unit passes the check without having to roll (or in some cases re-roll),

And as I think I just pointed out, in none of those precendents was there more than one end result possible. None of your "precedents" have the possible end result of falling back. Every single one of the precedents laid out had only one end result. Passing the check. If you want to list all your precedents I'd be happy to go through them one by one until we find one that is actually similar to GoW.

**Harkainos**

BBeale wrote:Come on Nurglitch, you know what point I was trying to make. I'm well aware of how the Anti-No Retreat crowd gets from point A to point B. That's not the issue. The point I was making is that while "automatically" is not expressly included in GOW, neither is immunity to No Retreat--both sides are working with interpretations and intent here. It just happens that in every incident to date where a unit passes a morale check regardless of the dice, GW has ruled that No Retreat applies.

Brice

I only agree with you in the fact that GW has never stated that the word automatic was what swayed their decisions in the other FAQ'd examples. However, they have set a precedent in the fact that ALL of those examples did have the word automatic in them. You (your warcamp) is the side going against that precedent.

--EDIT--

I'm back. BBeale, not picking on ya. Just seems like we happen to be limited of dakkaddicts at this point.

Now, one cannot ignore the FACT that No Retreat! is only activated by the reasons Nurglitch has posted (since they were cut and paste from the book). Unfortunately, automatically passing a morale test is one of the criteria.

We (the entire floor) have gone over and over what the definition of automatic, bring out dictionaries, diagrams, even slurs on others parents. Until we can come to an agreement on what automatic is, I call stalemate.

You believe that if no dice are rolled, it is automatic.

I believe that if there is any chance of a unit failing, it isn't automatic. I also believe that GoW expressly states a different method to taking morale tests.

**BBeale**

Nurglitch,

Among other things, there is a huge difference between choosing to pass a test and taking it. This has been discussed elsewhere, ad nauseum, and I don't have anything valuable to add. The assumption that they are they same underpins your entire position and only takes us back to whether or not "automatic" is redundant in the GOW context.

Breton,

All of the precedent you cited supports GOW triggering No Retreat. What you have done is attempt to distinguish it by stating that there are no possibilities of other outcomes from those rules aside from passing, so GOW should be treated differently. Your list noticably excludes Iron Will, which tournament judges have deemed triggers No Retreat. To date there is no precedent for the assertion that the absence of the magic word "automatic" or the ability to choose the outcome of a Morale Check grants immunity to No Retreat. It has been discussed, also ad nauseum, that many of those rules are highly situational, and those units are not always going to automatically pass morale checks. That's really a non-starter though. The issue for many people is whether or not dice are rolled in order for the unit to pass a morale check. That was certainly the crux of all of the FAQs discussing those rules.

Brice

**Timmah**

BBeale wrote:Timmah,
Instead of me searching for your shopping list of written rules we both know don't exist, why don't you show us all where the text of GOW states that No Retreat does not apply.

Brice

Ok, Please point me to the text where it states that Bolters are not Rending. You can't say because a rule doesn't state No Retreat doesn't applie means it doesn't.

BBeale wrote:Come on Nurglitch, you know what point I was trying to make. I'm well aware of how the Anti-No Retreat crowd gets from point A to point B. That's not the issue. The point I was making is that while "automatically" is not expressly included in GOW, neither is immunity to No Retreat--both sides are working with interpretations and intent here.
BBeale wrote:It just happens that in every incident to date where a unit passes a morale check regardless of the dice, GW has ruled that No Retreat applies.

Brice

If something isn't specifically stated in the rules it means it isn't according to RAW

GoW does not specifically state it is automatic just as Bolters do not specifically state they have rending.

Yet by your logic, I could say, show me where it is written Bolters do not have rending. And because you couldn't then I could say they do.

BBeale wrote:It just happens that in every incident to date where a unit passes a morale check regardless of the dice, GW has ruled that No Retreat applies.

Brice

Actually I have yet to see any ruling of this to date. Why? Because all of the previous examples have automatic written into the rule itself.

**Harkainos**

Reposting, as posts are just flying in:

I'm back. BBeale, not picking on ya. Just seems like we happen to be limited of dakkaddicts at this point.

Now, one cannot ignore the FACT that No Retreat! is only activated by the reasons Nurglitch has posted (since they were cut and paste from the book). Unfortunately, automatically passing a morale test is one of the criteria.

We (the entire floor) have gone over and over what the definition of automatic, bring out dictionaries, diagrams, even slurs on others parents. Until we can come to an agreement on what automatic is, I call stalemate.

You believe that if no dice are rolled, it is automatic.

I believe that if there is any chance of a unit failing, it isn't automatic. I also believe that GoW expressly states a different method to taking morale tests.

**Nurglitch**

BBeale:

You're putting the cart before the horse if you think that I am assuming that taking a Morale check and choosing to pass a Morale check are the same thing.

The fact is that it is the conclusion of my premises, which I take to be the text of the rules I have quoted, that taking a Morale check and passing on a roll of the dice is the same as taking a Morale check and passing on the whim of the player.

Whether you pass a Morale check thanks to either a random element or the exercise of agency, you:

1. Take a Morale check

2. Have the possibility of obtaining either outcome.

3. Have the possibility of falling back.

These three points contradict the conditions of the No Retreat! rule, and the only valid conclusion to draw from them is that a model with the God of War special rule is not subject to No Retreat! when the player chooses for it to pass any Morale check it is subjected to instead of failing it.

**BBeale**

Timmah,

Rending is a specific rule for weapons, inclusion of it means that the weapon rends. Rending has to be included in the stats of the weapon for it to work.

No Retreat is a specific rule for Morale Checks. All morale check of a certain type are affected by no retreat. In order for morale check of a certain type to be immune to No Retreat, that would have to be included in the discription of the unit.

There's no analogy there. It's apples and oranges. However, this does underscore the actual issue that we are trying to figure out--How is that certain type of Morale Check defined. Is it defined by effect (the passing of the test) or is it defined by cause (is there a choice). The waters are further muddied by how we define the cause and effect. Which is why we keep coming back to "automatic."

Brice

**Timmah**

BBeale wrote:
No Retreat is a specific rule for Morale Checks. All morale check of a certain type are affected by no retreat.

You are correct all morale checks of the "Automatic type" are subject to no retreat.

Now please show me where it is written that GoW is an automatic Morale check.

**BBeale**

Gah! I can't keep up anymore and I feel like everyone is just repeating themselves at this point (including me).

I agree with Harky though, it comes down to "automatic" (which causes several problems for both sides, not the least of which is if you have the power of choice it is axiomatic that your choice is implemented automatically). Until we get some common ground on that, we're just spinning our wheels until GW does what I think they'll do and apply No Retreat to GOW.

Brice