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.

watching a game yesterday (and had it happen in an earlier game as well) there was a sternguard unit facing a Carnifex. They fired at it, failed to kill it.

Next player's turn, they took fire, went to ground and then after losing 25% of their unit voluntarily failed a moral check, fell back 11 inches (nearly off the board), regrouped and began to fire the following round.

Now, besides fluff issues (I've always believed Marines wouldn't fall back for anything) exactly how many rules does this break?

3rd edition had a voluntary fallback, but marines couldn't use it. I can't find anything in 5th edition.

Would love to get some comments... Thanks

You're mijssing Combat Tactics, 5th ed marine codex.

Lets you choose to fail your morale check.

From what I can gleam from the rules, any marine unit can voluntarily fail their morale check. This is the combat tactics rule in effect. Then they fall back 2 d6 inches.

If they were within 6 inches of an enemy unit, they keep falling back 2d6 inches until they are outside of 6 inches of an enemy unit. At that point, they regroup automatically and can move, fire and assault as normal.

From what you described, they did nothing incorrectly.

Was there something else going on in the game (surrounded or locked in CC for instance)?

Marine units that do not have a character that has replaced COmbat Tactics may do so, however certain SCs replace this with Stubborn etc.

Actually, I'm not so sure. If you go to ground, you are, for all intents and purposes, pinned.

That by itself would prevent you from falling back, would it not? I don't recall ATSKNF and Combat Tactics allowing you to ignore the consequences for choosing to go to ground. Does Combat Tactics allow you to move and/or shoot in a turn after you elected to go to ground?

edited: clarity.

nope... don't own a marine codex and had never seen that rule..

I appreciate the info.. I'm a bit surprised, as that seems like a really powerful option.

Of course, when I first started playing back in 3rd edition, I thought it really sucked that marines couldn't do just that... for the same reasons as they can do it now, but I figured it was game balance.

Having went and looked up combat tactics, I now understand.. Thanks guys

He said they went to ground (which iirc INAT ruled isn't broken by forced movement like falling back, it reapplies after the movement) which would prevent them from acting as they did in the next turn unless there's a SM rule circumventing that.
Barring that wrinkle however, they're usually allowed to perform the rest of that sequence as far as I can see.

Gork: I didn't know that INAT had ruled that way, but those were the lines along which I was thinking.

I can't think of anything in the Combat Tactics, Falling Back, or ATSKNF rules that would over-ride the prohibition against moving and firing in the following turn that Going to Ground imposes upon the unit.

I could be missing something, but I, obviously, don't know what it is.

Go to Ground or pinning is broken by falling back. Units that are pinned or GtG are still required to take a Morale test if they take enough casualties and will fall back if they fail, acting normally after the fall back.

Page 24, main rules:
Whilst it has gone to ground the unit may do nothing of its own volition, but will react normally if affected by enemy actions (for example, it will take Morale tests as normal). If the unit has to fall back, it will return to normal immediately.

Actually, the INAT has ruled that GtG is not broken by Black Templars Righteous Zeal, not falling back.

From what I'm reading in the OP, the Marine player did everything correctly.

Ok, thanks.

Is pinning affected similarly? I would assume so, but just checking.

(I don't play any armies with ATSKNF; when I get pinned, I stay that way, and when I run, I usually keep running.)

Yes, pinning or GtG both are broken if the pinned/GtG unit fails a Morale test and runs away. Then on their next turn the falling back unit acts normally.

don_mondo wrote:Go to Ground or pinning is broken by falling back. Units that are pinned or GtG are still required to take a Morale test if they take enough casualties and will fall back if they fail, acting normally after the fall back.

Page 24, main rules:
Whilst it has gone to ground the unit may do nothing of its own volition, but will react normally if affected by enemy actions (for example, it will take Morale tests as normal). If the unit has to fall back, it will return to normal immediately.

Actually, the INAT has ruled that GtG is not broken by Black Templars Righteous Zeal, not falling back.

From what I'm reading in the OP, the Marine player did everything correctly.

Sounds good then, if that's true.
WTB computers in my college lab that can open a dang pdf so I can check the page I was thinking of in inat from here. ffs.

edit: Yep, I'm wrong.
RB.24A.02 – Q: If a special rule forces a unit that
has ‘[gone] to ground’ to move (not including a fall
back move which is covered in the rules) does the
unit return to its ‘[gone] to ground’ status when the
movement is finished?
A: Unless otherwise specified, yes [RAW].

One twist with Combat tactics is that the unit still has to "choose" to fall back.

In my mind this would prevent them from voluntarily falling back if they had already gone to ground, as being in a "gone-to-ground" state prevents the unit from doing anything of it's own volition.

It still has to take the morale check, since this is not something that they've chosen to do, it is something that is forced in reaction to taking 25% casualties.

However, they could not "choose" to fail the test, because that would be something that the unit has to do voluntarily.

willydstyle wrote:One twist with Combat tactics is that the unit still has to "choose" to fall back.

Technically, they're not choosing to Fall Back, they're just choosing to fail a Morale test.

Falling Back is a result of that, but not an action that they're specifically choosing.

They're still choosing to do something, which is specifically forbidden by the rules for going to ground.

Except that the GtG rule specifically allows the unit to take Morale tests 'as normal'

That just leaves you with the question as to whether that means 'as normal in the rulebook' or 'as normal for Space Marines'...

The former would indeed prevent them from choosing to fail the test... They can't do anything voluntarily, and so can not choose to fail the test.

The latter would allow them to choose to fail, since choosing to fail is simply a normal part of the Morale rules for Space Marines.

As normal would have to mean normal for Space Marines. Otherwise, being pinned would prevent you from using Fearless to automatically pass the test.

I see your point, just keep in mind that Fearless units can't be pinned in the first place.

However they can "GtG" just fine - which is the equivalent state to pinning.

If the sentence didnt mean "as normal for whoever is taking the test" then they could then not use "fearless" to pass the test.

I would tend to concur with Willy on this one. It’s an active choice whether to use Combat Tactics to voluntarily fail a morale test. So that should be prevented by having Gone to Ground, as a unit which has gone to ground can take no actions of any kind.

nosferatu1001 wrote:However they can "GtG" just fine - which is the equivalent state to pinning.

If the sentence didnt mean "as normal for whoever is taking the test" then they could then not use "fearless" to pass the test.

I don’t agree that this is a parallel case. Fearless doesn’t require an action or decision of any kind. It’s automatic.