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.

Hello folks... after a long Saturday of play we came across a number of questions foremost in my memory at least was the "No Retreat" Rule.

1:
Orc vs Chaos and a squad of Orcs assaults a group of Noise Marines. In the next round a group of lesser daemons are summoned and join the assault. Now after the combat was resolved the Chaos player lost the combat by 3 wounds. Since both units are Fearless they are subject to the "No Retreat" rule and have to make saves for those 3 wounds.

Does 'each' Fearless unit have to make 3 saves. A total of 6 saves. Or are the saves distributed between the two units?

2:
In the same situation. Orcs assault a group of marines and a Daemon Prince joins the combat. Again Orcs win the combat by 3 wounds. How are the wounds distributed.

Are all 3 wounds placed on the Daemon Prince as the marines will be taking a leadership test?


In either of these situations does the Orc player have to specify which unit they are attacking. For instance, If the Orc player puts all his attacks into the marines and then wins the combat by 3 wounds is the Daemon Prince exempt from taking the "No Retreat" saves.

Page 44 - No Retreat.

1: it's 3 per unit, yes.

2: only the prince is subject to No Retreat. He takes as many wounds as his side lost combat by.

The Ork player doesn't need to attack a unit for it to suffer from No Retreat wounds as long as it's on the losing side.

Spetulhu has it right, the only notable exception, although I doubt it applied in this situation, is if one side cannot mathematically wound the other then there are no No Retreat! wounds inflicted.

So a unit of orks with no power fist (and thus with no str higher than 3) could not force a fearless unit of T 7 or greater to take No Retreat wounds by defeating other units on the same side as the high toughness one in a large melee.

Each unit on the losing side faces the same magnitude penalty for being on the losing side. For non-fearless units, that penalty gets applied to their morale check, and for fearless units that penalty gets turned into wounds. It doesn't matter how many units are on the losing side, the same modifier applies to all of them. It's harsh, but that's the way it works.

So, in situation 1, each of the fearless units has to make three saves. In situation two, you have two units on the losing side and each unit has to face the three point penalty. If the prince is fearless, that's three wounds to save against, or a -3 to his morale check. Same applies to the marines.

It wouldn't make any difference if you had five units of plague marines fighting two units pain boy laden nobs in some massive, mixed together mess or if you had a hundred units of plague marines fighting three hundred units of orcs (if you could somehow arrange that big of a multiple combat). If the plague marines side lost the combat by X, each of the plague marine units would be dealt X saveable, feel-no-pain-able wounds. If a non-fearless unit of regular Chaos Marines joined in and the Chaos side still lost by Y, then each of the plague marines would roll for saves and feel-no-pain against Y wounds, and the regular Chaos Marines would take their -Y morale check.

Okay... as long as they are joined in the combat.

However the 3 wounds per unit. This could quite quickly become a large multiple of wounds. 3, 6, 9, 12. In a Daemon Army this would quickly destroy an entire CC attack. It doesnt sound right.

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

wow that is stupidly harsh... I feel sorry for Daemon armies now!

oh please. If you have that any units in CC, and are *still* losing combat, you deserve to lose.

? against Orks ?
30 Orks vs a handful of individual daemons...

Because completely random dice roles means that someone should deserve to get beaten.

Someone forgot to have some coffee this morning.

While firing my Noise marines at his other horde I rolled I think 19 1's n 2's out of 27 shots. You are right though I totally deserved that ?: /

Ealiom wrote:wow that is stupidly harsh... I feel sorry for Daemon armies now!

i SERIOUSLY DISAGREE with you. being a daemon player myself, i'd kick my own ass if i let my daemons get assaulted by 30 man ork squads. And mind you, there are ways to get rid of them and its not letting them assault your daemons.

and yes, its "harsh" for the insanely stupid.

Ealiom wrote:? against Orks ?
30 Orks vs a handful of individual daemons...

Because completely random dice roles means that someone should deserve to get beaten.

Yes, because either you were stupid enough to let him charge all three of them at the same time, or you were *really* stupid, and charged his unit with all three. Either way, you deserve what happens.

coredump wrote:

Ealiom wrote:? against Orks ?
30 Orks vs a handful of individual daemons...

Because completely random dice roles means that someone should deserve to get beaten.

Yes, because either you were stupid enough to let him charge all three of them at the same time, or you were *really* stupid, and charged his unit with all three. Either way, you deserve what happens.

/end thread

Just remember, Alessio wrote both the Fantasy book and now the 40K book. Combat res works the same in both systems. Welcome to 5th edition.

Homer

Yeah thats why we now have in 40k outnumbering, rank bonuses, musicians to break ties and.........er What??

coredump wrote:

Ealiom wrote:? against Orks ?
30 Orks vs a handful of individual daemons...

Because completely random dice roles means that someone should deserve to get beaten.

Yes, because either you were stupid enough to let him charge all three of them at the same time, or you were *really* stupid, and charged his unit with all three. Either way, you deserve what happens.

Much better to charge orks than get charged next turn. He'd go on a higher init and the orks would only be swinging S 3. If he took some out with shooting, he could probably mop them up (unless they are 'ard boyz). You might not be able to wipe out the entire squad, but you should win by the sheer number of ork bodies lying around after.

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

Note that the rule says "units" not "each unit". So I would read this as: the wounds are shared between the squads.

Each unit takes a number of wounds based on the total that their side lost by. Or are you going to start dividing up the negative to Morale checks in multiple unit combats as well.. Geee, I've got three units on my side losing in a mass combat, I'm going to divide the -6 to a -2 apiece. Yeah, right, I don't think so. So why would anyone think that the No Retreat wounds are split up?

btw: if you are unsure on a rule [worded badly*cough*] go to te faq on GW.

i just wanted to look at my signiture lol!