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.

OK, now post the Standard rules for comparison...............

forkbanger wrote:That argument leads to all rerolls becoming illegal, though.
If you roll and fail, then reroll and pass, you haven't failed and so couldn't reroll your original failure. So you've failed. So you can use your reroll, but if you pass you've succeeded and so couldn't reroll and...

I really have to agree with this. You have this series of effects that occur if a test fails:

If you have a commissar, someone gets shot and you reroll.
You fall back 2d6 inches.

If you have a standard, then you have to reroll the outcome of the test. Why can't that be put on the order of operations higher than the commissar? If rerolls can save you from "Gets hot!" then I don't see why they can't save you from Summary Execution.

Things like re-rolls often say "if you fail, re-roll" or "re-roll misses" or even "Re-roll made saves," but what it means is "re-roll any dice that would normally lead to failure."

If not, then you would re-roll your morale after falling back, re-roll fortune saves after removing models, etc.

I would argue that triggers like that are keyed to final results. By strict reading, if a unit with a commissar within 12" of the standard failed a morale check, it would:

Re-roll it's leadership twice while also falling back.

There are no rules for timing, so there is no way to really determine which goes first, the commissar or the standard.

Interestingly, in the old codex you took the standard re-foll, and if you still failed the commissar executed the leader, and then the squad took a seperate moral check to not break. That's obviously no longer the rules, but this is why it wasn't an issue before.

Stupid question: is there anything to be said for the fact that the commissar's "must take a re-roll" language could over-ride the no double re-roll rule? It's a pretty ironclad rule, so I don't think so, but it's got to be a possibility, right?

Polonius wrote:Stupid question: is there anything to be said for the fact that the commissar's "must take a re-roll" language could over-ride the no double re-roll rule? It's a pretty ironclad rule, so I don't think so, but it's got to be a possibility, right?

Specific > General. Hilariously enough, I think you might be on to something.

Ennkay wrote:

If the commissar's unit fails a morale test the commissar will summarily execute the squad's current commander - this is the model in the squad with the highest leadership value.

If two ore more models in the same squad as the commissar have the same leadership value, randomly determine which of the models is executed. A commissar of either rank will never execute himself or another commissar of either rank - ignore these models when determining who is eligible for execution

The executed model is immediately removed as a casualty, regardless of the number of wounds remaining. the unit in question must then re-roll the failed morale check - if this test also fails then the squad falls back as normal

Ig codex pg 32

I would say that based on this wording the sgt gets Blamd as an event triggered by failing the morale test, so before anything happens you lose your sgt. afterwards you would re-roll via summary execution or regimental standard(not that it matters)

How do you reconcile that with the fact that fall back is triggered by a failed morale test?

Whilst the standard bearer is still alive, his squad counts as scoring one additional wound for the purposes of calculating close combat results. In addition, any friendly units within 12" re-roll failed morale and pinning tests.

Ig codex pg 71.

In order to re-roll a morale test you have to had failed it in the first place, as the commissar's special rule triggers when you fail a morale test the leader is removed.

daedalus wrote:

Polonius wrote:Stupid question: is there anything to be said for the fact that the commissar's "must take a re-roll" language could over-ride the no double re-roll rule? It's a pretty ironclad rule, so I don't think so, but it's got to be a possibility, right?

Specific > General. Hilariously enough, I think you might be on to something.

Page 2 of the BGB is pretty specific that you can't re-roll a re-roll "regardless of source."

I think the easiest solution is to break as few rules as possible. therefore, when a squad fails, it triggers both the standard and the commissar, they lose a leader, get ONE re-roll, and then move on. The standard merely requires that failures be re-rolled, it doesn't have to be the source.

Ennkay wrote:

Whilst the standard bearer is still alive, his squad counts as scoring one additional wound for the purposes of calculating close combat results. In addition, any friendly units within 12" re-roll failed morale and pinning tests.

Ig codex pg 71.

In order to re-roll a morale test you have to had failed it in the first place, as the commissar's special rule triggers when you fail a morale test the leader is removed.

To repeat, if you pass a reroll allowed (forced) by the standard then it's as if you never failed the test at all. So why is the Commissar shooting someone if you never failed the test.
The Commissar shooting someone is triggered by failing a Morale test. Both the Commissar and Standard require you to reroll. So if you're allowed to choose the order in which they are applied (and no reason you shouldn't be able to choose the order that I can see), then you resolve the standard first. If you pass it, you have not failed a Morale test so the Commissar doesn't shoot anyone.

Don: I think the problem is that if we assume there is a "reaction" step between failing an initial morale test and falling back, to allow re-rolls, than it should trigger all of them.

Meaning, any conditions that trigger the Standard also trigger the commissar. I think there are some good arguments to be made for why a commissar would hold back to allow the CCS to bring the men in line, but they're not RAW rules.

Choosing order is moot in this case, because it's possible to perform both simultaneously.

I see what you're saying but I disagree.

I actually agree that you're reasoning is sound. My reasoning simply has the advantage of definitely not breaking any rules.

I don't think mine does either. If I thought it broke rules, I wouldn't agree with it.............

The commisar because he shoots if they fail it and they failed. Also the regimental standard would now become obsolete here as you cannot re-roll a re-roll.

The commisar because he shoots if they fail it and they failed. Also the regimental standard would now become obsolete here as you cannot re-roll a re-roll.

I don't think that your way breaks any rules either, simply because the rules are very grey. I'm more concered about playign in practice, where knowing what's nearly impossible to call illegal is useful. I think a person could make a case against your method, mine is pretty secure.

40k isn't big into simultaneity. Things resolve in order.