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.

Ailaros wrote:It's a FAQ, not a rule.

Furthermore, the only time that this will matter is when you're shooting something that's in cover that's close enough to charge you. Why are you getting into this position in the first place?

Most of the time, going to ground would just give you a 6+ cover save, but don't they already get a 6++ invul save?

And for purposes of discussion on this forum, it's a rule......................... (ie FAQs are considered "official")

nosferatu1001 wrote:Bigdunc - except that is not what the FAQ says.
They are both GtG; one is voluntary, one is through failing a pinning check. The end result is the same (GtG) even if the method BY which you get there is different.

The FAQ say that Pinned is the same as GtG, but it does not say GtG is the same as Pinned. It's subtle, but really boils down to how it's worded and the inclusion of the 'failing a pinning test' part.
It works like this:


For the FAQ to mean they are the same thing, it would have to be changed to say something like this:
Q: If I find a reference to a unit that is ‘pinned’, does it
mean a unit that has gone to ground? (p24)
A: Yes, ‘pinned’ is simply a short way of saying ‘gone to
ground’.

The only thing I've removed is 'by failing a pinning test'. Now it sounds like they're the same in both directions.

The "end result" argument doesn't really work. Take for example Fearless and ATSKNF in close combat. Both have the end result of No Retreat armor saves, so does that make them the same rule too? No. This is what I mean by they function differently (because of the failed pinning test).

Alternatively, it could be argued that Pinned as a unit status or condition does not exist in 5E. The FAQ says that once you fail a pinning test, it's the same as being GtG. So, you can never actually be pinned, only GtG. If pinned as a condition doesn't exist, then the word Pinned can be ignored in the BT codex in the RZ paragraphs and allows us to return to normal after being GtG.

Remember, RZ does not work on Pinned units, as per the BT codex, which is the point of this necromanced discussion.

@ Ailaros- RZ is not identical to a Consolidation Move. It can't logically be (despite having the word identical in the codex) and still fulfill the 'must move toward the nearest visible enemy unit' part of RZ. RZ merely takes on some aspects of a C-move.

I've started running a BT pod army. Dropping in my opponent's face, giving myself cover with the pod, going to ground to give that unit ghetto Storm Shields (which is in effect what this is) then zealing out of it next turn can be useful.

Seriously? How hard is this to understand?

Gone to ground voluntarily =/= failing a pinning test and being forced to go to ground.

Yes, the result of both is that you are gone to ground, but if you elect to go to ground, you did not fail a pinning test.

If you did not fail a pinning test, you must test for Righteous Zeal if you lose 1 model.

If you pass Righteous Zeal, you move up to D6" towards the closest enemy unit.

BRB FAQ says forced movement brings a unit out of gone to ground.

Out of gone to ground means the unit is no longer prevented from taking action on the following player turn.

bigdun - except that is not correct. Your venn diagram is erroneous.

The "by" clause is entirely irrelevant. you ARE GtG IF you fail a pinning test OR if you choose to GtG.

Whether you are GtG BY failing a pinning test or not is irrelevant. Your ATSKNF / Fearless "functional equivalence" is also a bad analogy, as the two states are not just functionally equivalent, they ARE equivalent.

If you fail a pinning check you are pinned, which IS gone to ground
IF you choose to go to ground, you are Gone to Ground.

pinned = involuntary GtG
GtG = voluntary GtG

Not sure how many ways to put it, but in either case if you are forced to move you are "released" from GtG, REGARDLESS of how you achieved that state in the first place.

Yep, the failed pinning test bubble should be totally enclosed by the GtG bubble, as pinned is a subset of the overall GtG. And pinned or GtG, doesn't matter, the BT unit will take it's zeal test regardless of which one they're affected by. And pass or fail, either way they break the pinning/GtG. Pass, zeal towards the nearest enemy, fail, fall back.

@ nosferatu- would you agree that "pinned" as a unit condition doesn't exist? I get that impression from your post.

"pinned" is congruent with GtG, just involuntary.

Interesting debate. This is where I stand being a BT player.

The going to ground rule in the rulebook says the unit will react normally if affected by enemy actions (for example, it will take a Morale tests). If the unit is forced to fall back it will return to normal immediately. If its assaulted, same deal. So yeah if he goes to ground and then is forced to make a righteous zeal test, he is forced to run forward (or backwards) and is broken free of the gone to ground effect. The rule gives the example of falling back or being assaulted but does not say it is limited to these two scenarios.

-edit

I think the problem here is people are (or were) interpreting the GtG rule to be limited to falling back or being assaulted. But if you read it carefully it is just giving those 2 as examples.

LordofSteel wrote:Interesting debate. This is where I stand being a BT player.

The going to ground rule in the rulebook says the unit will react normally if affected by enemy actions (for example, it will take a Morale tests). If the unit is forced to fall back it will return to normal immediately. If its assaulted, same deal. So yeah if he goes to ground and then is forced to make a righteous zeal test, he is forced to run forward (or backwards) and is broken free of the gone to ground effect. The rule gives the example of falling back or being assaulted but does not say it is limited to these two scenarios.

-edit

I think the problem here is people are (or were) interpreting the GtG rule to be limited to falling back or being assaulted. But if you read it carefully it is just giving those 2 as examples.

The rulebook was pretty clear before in stating a G2g unit returns to normal after falling back or being assaulted. They are not given as examples. The example they give is taking morale tests as per normal, one example how a gone to ground unit takes involuntary actions when gone to ground.

Before the FAQ, the only written stipulations for breaking gone to ground was a fall back move or being assaulted. Just recently in the FAQ did they state other moves would break gone to ground.

Righteous zeal is not a fallback move. Its a consolidation move (you don't have to move your models if you don't want to, but they still count as moved) with the special stipulation that you must perform this move toward the nearest enemy unit.

nosferatu1001 wrote:"pinned" is congruent with GtG, just involuntary.

Do you support BT's ability to return to normal after being GtG? Do you support BT's ability to return to normal after failing a pinning test and being GtG? You haven't said in this thread so far. I have a feeling we're arguing for no reason.

Its a consolidation move (you don't have to move your models if you don't want to, but they still count as moved)

RZ is only similar to a consolidation move. Technically you have to move the models. Effectively you don't have to move the models (because the required move can be microscopic). It's nitpicking but helps in the long run considering the new FAQ and the "forced" aspect of GtG,

scubasteve04 wrote:
The rulebook was pretty clear before in stating a G2g unit returns to normal after falling back or being assaulted. They are not given as examples. The example they give is taking morale tests as per normal, one example how a gone to ground unit takes involuntary actions when gone to ground.

Before the FAQ, the only written stipulations for breaking gone to ground was a fall back move or being assaulted. Just recently in the FAQ did they state other moves would break gone to ground.

Righteous zeal is not a fallback move. Its a consolidation move (you don't have to move your models if you don't want to, but they still count as moved) with the special stipulation that you must perform this move toward the nearest enemy unit.

"The unit will react normally if affected by enemy actions (for example, it will take Morale tests as normal)." BRB.

"In the shooting phase, any infantry unit that is not Pinned or Falling Back must take a Morale Check if it suffers any casualties". BT Codex.

Thus the unit takes its morale check and reacts normally.

It's easy to argue that Pining and going to ground are the same thing, but they are not. Pinning causes GtG, however GtG does not cause Pinning. Pinning does not give you a bonus cover save, Pinning is a completely separate rule, Pinning is offensive while GtG is defensive. Similar, but not the same thing.

-edit. If the BT's did not go to ground but instead were pinned by his opponent that's a different story. In that case he would not make his Morale Check.

While it is true that Pinning Weapons do not give you a -1+ Cover save, And it is also true that taking a Pinning Test does not give the Cover Bonus...

Once you have failed the Pinning Test you will have Gone to Ground and thus will have the -1+ Cover save Bonus.

Kommissar Kel wrote:While it is true that Pinning Weapons do not give you a -1+ Cover save, And it is also true that taking a Pinning Test does not give the Cover Bonus...

Once you have failed the Pinning Test you will have Gone to Ground and thus will have the -1+ Cover save Bonus.

If it said in the going to ground rule that the unit is now considered pinned fine. But it doesn't. They are separate rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordofSteel wrote:

Kommissar Kel wrote:While it is true that Pinning Weapons do not give you a -1+ Cover save, And it is also true that taking a Pinning Test does not give the Cover Bonus...

Once you have failed the Pinning Test you will have Gone to Ground and thus will have the -1+ Cover save Bonus.

If it said in the going to ground rule that the unit is now considered pinned fine. But it doesn't. They are separate rules.

-edit, sorry if you weren't disagreeing with me. It seemed like you were on first glance. And yes they get the cover bonus after the pinning test is failed, but not by the shots being fired at them, as going to ground would.

No it says in pinning that the unit "is immediately forced to go to ground"

Go to ground tells you that you get the -1+ cover save bonus. Pinning does not say that the bonus is negated nor ignored(beyond the fact that the GtG bonus does not apply to the shooting that cuased the pinning test because you have to have already attempted your save vs that shooting).

Kommissar Kel wrote:No it says in pinning that the unit "is immediately forced to go to ground"

Go to ground tells you that you get the -1+ cover save bonus. Pinning does not say that the bonus is negated nor ignored.

Lets say I shoot an IG infantry squad with a sniper rifle, and a lascannon. I roll the sniper shot first, you take a casualty and fail the Pinning test, you go to ground. I shoot the lascannon next, you don't get a cover save.

Anyway, consider this. Rules often leave you on a trail, (see page 500) then on page 500 (see page 444). This is because one rule will include another rule into itself, do not confuse yourself by thinking that its a two way street. A Pinned unit is forced to "Go To Ground" a separate rule which is why they lead you to the appropriate page to read the separate rule. GtG does not lead you to the Pinning rule, because the Pinning rule is not included.

A unit is only ever pinned if it has failed a pinning test. Simple as that.

Automatically Appended Next Post:


-edit again it's hard to see if your for or against the rule at debate here, these extra side details like the cover save are superfluous. So if you are in agreeance my apologies.

if the lascannon is from the same unit, correct no cover save ...

All shooting(and Shooting resolution) from individual units happen simultaneously; so no you would not get the Cover bonus against the lascannon.

the only thing the pinning rules does is force a Go to Ground, and detail how they force a go to ground. Also they tell you that if you are already Pinned you cannot be Pinned again.

You are correct Pinning is a separate rule from Go to Ground; but the end result of that rule is that you have gone to ground, and that is all.

Kommissar Kel wrote:All shooting(and Shooting resolution) from individual units happen simultaneously; so no you would not get the Cover bonus against the lascannon.

the only thing the pinning rules does is force a Go to Ground, and detail how they force a go to ground. Also they tell you that if you are already Pinned you cannot be Pinned again.

You are correct Pinning is a separate rule from Go to Ground; but the end result of that rule is that you have gone to ground, and that is all.

Agreed.

-edit, so are we in agreeance that the BT's in fact can go to ground and make their righteous zeal move?

I am not getting into that debate.

Sorry, I only wanted to clear the "new posts" indicator so i could easily tell which threads I have read, and which ones had new content; then I saw your post and felt the need to point out that Pinning does nothing other than force go-to-ground(which is different from the rule as written in 3rd and 4th; when the codex was written).

Kommissar Kel wrote:I am not getting into that debate.

Sorry, I only wanted to clear the "new posts" indicator so i could easily tell which threads I have read, and which ones had new content; then I saw your post and felt the need to point out that Pinning does nothing other than force go-to-ground(which is different from the rule as written in 3rd and 4th; when the codex was written).

lol, alright. My post was misinterpreted by the majority. I was in-fact implying that the following shots from the rest of the unit would ignore the cover saves, to further enhance my point that Pinning is offensive and GtG is defensive.

-edit below

I kind of feel like that misinterpretation shadowed my real argument, so just to keep it fresh for anyone who is still in this debate -

"The unit will react normally if affected by enemy actions (for example, it will take Morale tests as normal)." BRB. (G2G rule)

"In the shooting phase, any infantry unit that is not Pinned or Falling Back must take a Morale Check if it suffers any casualties". BT Codex. (RZ rule)

Thus the unit takes its morale check and reacts normally. And GtG does not count as being pinned which we concluded already.

Except there are no "following " shots, as everything is simultaneous. So your example is wrong.

If you are pinned you are GtG, meaning anythiugn that "breaks" G2G will affect you if you are pinned.

So they will zeal forwards.

Edit: Zeal requires you to end up closer to the enemy than you were before, and as such you MUST move

If you are pinned you are GtG, meaning anything that "breaks" G2G will affect you if you are pinned.

I feel like you're contradicting yourself here.

You're say that if you are pinned you are GtG. In effect, pinned 'transforms' into GtG after the failed test. Once you are GtG, you completely forget about the failed test. Its irrelevant at that point. The condition of being GtG is all that matters. This gives me the impression that you think pinned as a unit condition doesn't exist (you didn't really answer my question from before).

But then you end your sentence with "if you are pinned". And if you're pinned, a BT unit will not take a RZ morale test.

In most situations you're right, anything that breaks GtG will affect you if you are pinned. EXCEPT for RZ where the rule clearly states Pinned units will not zeal.

Pinning forces you to go to ground.

THats it. There is no "piinned" real state any longer.

Well if you want to get techincal about it, RZ says that any unit that is not already pinned or falling back must take a morale check etc.

So if you kill someone with a pinning weapon, sure you may pin them, but at the time you wounded them they were NOT pinned, and therefore qualify for a RZ move that turn.

If a BT unit has a heavy weapon moves then runs. can they gtg then RZ and fire next turn?

Yes, as they are no longer GtG and then, assuming they dont move in their movement phase, can fire as normal.

Being heavy just means they dont have to move in that turn - doesnt interact any more specially with RZ than that.

When a unit has finished their RZ move, they are under the same effects as ATSKNF, in that they do not count as moving. Think of it like a space marine "rally" in a sense if that helps you.

nosferatu1001 wrote:There is no "pinned" real state any longer.

Agreed.

@ liam0404- You've added "already" to the rule and that makes a big difference. Both regular morale tests and RZ morale tests happen at the end of the shooting phase. Pinning tests happen immediately after the casualty is removed and before another unit shoots.

So here's the way I could see this happening (this assumes you don't accept the 'pinned doesn't exist' position):
A 5-man Crusader Squad takes 1 pinning casualty and fails the pinning test. They are immediately pinned. If no more wounds are caused that shooting phase the squad remains pinned and does not take a RZ morale test. But, if another casualty is inflicted on top of the pinning casualty (2 of 5= 40%), then the Crusader Squad would take a normal morale test at the end of the turn as per the BRB. If failed, the unit would fall back, if passed the unit would not zeal forward because it's a normal morale test. From what I can tell, RZ doesn't completely replace a regular morale test. It's only when being pinned that you'd run into a situation where you'd take a normal morale test for casualties.

That situation is really just academic in nature, especially if "pinned" as a status doesn't exist in 5E. That really is the easiest solution, but unfortunately, it's just an interpretation of the rules.

Pinned is clearly defined in the Black Templar Codex FAQ, the only place where it really needs to be defined

So a BRB rule needs to be defined in a FAQ for a 4th ed codex?

Nope, not seeing it myself. (Btw, it does not define "pinned", it uses the word but does not define the state)