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.

Alright, time to set the scene.
I charge a squad of 10hard boys with my 5 man command squad. My command squad has tones of over priced gear. The squad of boys is 11 strong, 10 boys, 1 nob. I have a high initiative and strike first, I cause five unsaved wounds to the orks. They cause one unsaved wound to my squad. I have won the combat by 4 and i get +1 for having a banner.

I THOUGHT (as i am not sure) I caused 5 wounds, along with another 5 at the end of the combat.

My Opponent THOUGH: since he had less then 10 orks he was no longer fearless and could test and retreat as normal.

He was fearless at the start of combat so does he take a penalty from that?
Does he end up taking 5 wounds total? Or soak up 5 more wounds from being fearless and suffering no retreat?
It almost seemed unfair i would loose one model and he would loose 10.


(I know fearless has been covered lots but i am curious about the mob rule and if the banner works in this manner?)

Count the number of models when the orks take the test. They can then exchange their ld with the number of models.
In this case they would be ld7 (their base) and would lose by 5, testing on ld2.

Ah, thank you. So they will probably get cut down in a sweeping advance anyways.

Oscarius wrote:Count the number of models when the orks take the test. They can then exchange their ld with the number of models.
In this case they would be ld7 (thier base) and would lose by 5, testing on ld2.

Actually, it seems there is a running debate about when leadership modifiers will apply here. If you caused 5 unsaved wounds, then he lost four models, I assume (and applied the other wound to his Nob), thus leaving him with 7 models in unit. The following two interpretations both seem valid:

1. His Ld is 7 (Ld) or 7 (# of models), minus 5, which is 2.

2. His Ld is 7, minus 5, so he substitutes number of models, which is 7.

MekanobSamael wrote: The following two interpretations both seem valid:

1. His Ld is 7 (Ld) or 7 (# of models), minus 5, which is 2.

2. His Ld is 7, minus 5, so he substitutes number of models, which is 7.

Number 2 is not valid. Nothing allows you to re-substitute his size after modifiers. Ork players just like this interpretation because it benefits them personally.

#2 is 10,000% wrong.

His Ld is 7, not "His Ld is 7 after any and all modifiers".

His Ld is 7 with any applicable modifiers.

Keep in mind Mob rule is OPTIONAL.

Thank you all for clearing that up. Now i need to find a way to get some high ini space marines.

As an ork player, I would say that the unit takes the fearless wounds. These wounds represent the frenzied, confused behavior of a mob that knows it's lost a fight. After which, it is no longer fearless, understandably so.

And if they were more than 10 models strong, they would take fearless wounds.

But, since they are below 11 models at the time of the test, they have to test.

it does say "normal leadership" under the mob rule. So Gwar is clearly right.........not that he needs anyone to tell him that.

thunderingjove wrote:As an ork player, I would say that the unit takes the fearless wounds. These wounds represent the frenzied, confused behavior of a mob that knows it's lost a fight. After which, it is no longer fearless, understandably so.

Except that that's defining RAW based on fluff, and 100% wrong.

Ld is calculated when the morale check is taken. At that time, if the unit does not meet the qualifiers to be Fearless, it is not.

As an Ork player who plays fair, I play by the rules, not the fluff.

Geemoney wrote:So Gwar is clearly right.........not that he needs anyone to tell him that.

No-one wants to inflate Gwars ego... he might float away...

SaintHazard wrote:As an Ork player who plays fair, I play by the rules, not the fluff.

Because fluff-wise, orks don't lose right?

-----

Back on topic.
Fearless is calculated at the point in time when the test is taken.
For example...

30 boys.
Large, rule-breaking unit of snipers target the boys... killing 19 of them, Boys take a pinning test! There ar 11 boyz left, so they are fearless... 19 losses appearing to have no dent in their morale!
Lone guardsman pops off a shot and kills 'Gobsmash'... dropping the orks to 10...
At the end of the shooting phase they have lost 66% so must take a morale test, 10 orks left means they are no longer fearless.

Pretty much, yeah.

In fact, can we start defining RAW based on fluff? I really want to.

That way I can just bring my Orks, and since Orks cannot lose, I win every game.

I would love to play based on fluff-rules in a few tournaments.

Until I go up against another Ork player. I'm fairly sure that would cause the universe to implode.

the 25% casualities from shooting is calculated from the number of models at the beginning of that shooting phase NOT what they were initially at the start of the game.

30 orks take 2 Vindicator pie plates over 2 turns dropping to 12 orks total.


Space marine shooting kills 3 orks. they are no longer fearless, but since they didn't lose 25% of the squad in that shooting phase they don't test.


next turn 3 more orks die leaving 6 alive which was 30% dead in 1 shooting phase. Now they will test on Ld7.

You take the leadership check at the end of the shooting phase, not the end of the shooting attack. There aren't twenty different shooting phases per shooting phase, that'd be stupid and contradictory.

Also, your basic arithmetic is wrong. 3 is 25% of 12. Way to go on that one.

Anyway, they WOULD take a leadership check at the end of the shooting phase, (again, not at the end of the shooting attack) at which point they have taken 24 casualties. They would not be Fearless, and they would be at Ld 7 - 17 to a minimum of 2, so essentially Ld 2.

Unless you rolled snake eyes, those Orks would take off like bats out of hell.

Page 44 of the small rulebook, under "Morale," subsection "Taking Morale Checks," subsection "A) Casualties.":

"A unit losing 25% or more of its models during a
single phase must pass a Morale check at the end
of that phase, or else it will fall back."

Emphasis mine.

SaintHazard wrote:
Anyway, they WOULD take a leadership check at the end of the shooting phase, (again, not at the end of the shooting attack) at which point they have taken 24 casualties. They would not be Fearless, and they would be at Ld 7 - 17 to a minimum of 2, so essentially Ld 2.

One point to correct, the minus for number of wounds taken does not apply outside of hth. So the Orks taking Morale due to shooting attacks will not have a minus applied to their test.

It actually(IIRC) is MORE then 25% in a shooting phase. a little mess up on my part on my Clarity.

you will notice i actually had 4 shooting phases total.

phase 1: Vindicator blast

Phase 2: Vindicator blast

Phase 3: Smarines shooting at them dropping 3

Phase4: more marines shooting and then a test.

don_mondo wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:
Anyway, they WOULD take a leadership check at the end of the shooting phase, (again, not at the end of the shooting attack) at which point they have taken 24 casualties. They would not be Fearless, and they would be at Ld 7 - 17 to a minimum of 2, so essentially Ld 2.

One point to correct, the minus for number of wounds taken does not apply outside of hth. So the Orks taking Morale due to shooting attacks will not have a minus applied to their test.

Yes, they will, but it has nothing to do with wounds. Rather, -1 for each model removed as a casualty over 25%, hence -17 to their leadership (since 25% of 30 is 7.5, rounded up to 8. 24 - 8 = 16, so actually it should've been -16 instead of -17, which still comes out to the minimum of 2).

Unless I'm wrong about that somehow?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey Templar wrote:It actually(IIRC) is MORE then 25% in a shooting phase. a little mess up on my part on my Clarity.

you will notice i actually had 4 shooting phases total.

phase 1: Vindicator blast

Phase 2: Vindicator blast

Phase 3: Smarines shooting at them dropping 3

Phase4: more marines shooting and then a test.

It's not "more than." Read the quote. It's 25% or more.

That's not four shooting phases. That's four shooting attacks in one shooting phase.

Unless I'm wrong about that somehow?

You seldom get any minuses on your leadership during shooting. (Unless cause of some special rule)
You pretty much always test on your base ld.

Also, Grey Templar SAID that that was over the course of 4 turns, then you can't just say that it was in a single phase.

SaintHazard - you are entirely wrong. The only negatives to morale caused by shooting is from barrage (and then that is for pinning) and from special rules. If you take 25% casualties you test for morale on your normal leadership.

Oscarius wrote:You seldom get any minuses on your leadership during shooting. (Unless cause of some special rule)
You pretty much always test on your base ld.

Well bloody hell, I've been playing it wrong all this time. My Pathfinders definitely need to get their gak together and quit taking leadership tests at LD7 when they lose a guy!

Oscarius wrote:Also, Grey Templar SAID that that was over the course of 4 turns, then you can't just say that it was in a single phase.

Selective reading on my part.

Apologies to GT.

However, you're still wrong about the third turn. Killing 3 out of 12 would still force a morale check, as it's "25% or more," not "more than 25%", as per the rulebook quote I gave you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And I'm looking through the rulebook right now, and I see nothing telling me that I need to subtract from their leadership when taking a morale check in the shooting phase. I'm scratching my head as to where that notion even came from.