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.

Battleshock requires you to roll a d6, adding the number of models slain to the result. If you roll higher than your unit's Ld, the Battleshock roll is failed and you lose a number of models equal to the diff.

Now, we know that rerolls apply before modifiers.

Given these two aspects, is the number of models lost considered a modifier to the Battleshock roll? If so, this means that unless your unit has less than Ld 6, it would RAW never have the ability to "reroll a failed Battleshock roll."

The Morale rules (it’s not called Battleshock in 40K) spell out exactly what a failed result is. The number of models slain is therefore part of the process and not a modifier.

I mean, we can argue about whether or not that classifies as modifying a roll, or we can assume that since there are options in the game that offer the ability to reroll a failed Ld test than it's possible to reroll.

I think that the intention is clear. Modifiers to a Leadership value are called modifiers, such as the Hemlock Wraithfighter reducing enemy Ld by -2. In such a case, if you lost 5 models and had a modifier of -2 than you'd be left with a -2 modifier, not a -7. Though, obviously this is a modifier to the Leadership value and not to the Battleshock dice roll. Are there any abilities that allow you to modify your Battleshock roll?

I believe that the Battleshock mechanic is not modifying the roll. Roll a d6 and add the number of slain models to the result isn't modifying the result, it's simply a mechanic to bring you to a number. Imagine if it was take the number of slain models an add a d6 to it.

The Chaos Space Marines Word Bearers Legion trait allows them to reroll Morale tests. Certainly you aren't suggesting that they'll never be allowed to.

They are Word Bearers. It's entirely possible GW doesn't care. Is adding modifying? Let's find out.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Battleshock requires you to roll a d6, adding the number of models slain to the result. If you roll higher than your unit's Ld, the Battleshock roll is failed and you lose a number of models equal to the diff.

Now, we know that rerolls apply before modifiers.

Given these two aspects, is the number of models lost considered a modifier to the Battleshock roll? If so, this means that unless your unit has less than Ld 6, it would RAW never have the ability to "reroll a failed Battleshock roll."

You're not modifying the roll, you're rolling a dice to get an independent number, then adding the slain model count to that number. It's a subtle difference but it does make a difference.

That being said, I can see your point, perhaps we have been playing wrong.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Battleshock requires you to roll a d6, adding the number of models slain to the result. If you roll higher than your unit's Ld, the Battleshock roll is failed and you lose a number of models equal to the diff.

Now, we know that rerolls apply before modifiers.

Given these two aspects, is the number of models lost considered a modifier to the Battleshock roll? If so, this means that unless your unit has less than Ld 6, it would RAW never have the ability to "reroll a failed Battleshock roll."

You're not modifying the roll, you're rolling a dice to get an independent number, then adding the slain model count to that number. It's a subtle difference but it does make a difference.

That being said, I can see your point, perhaps we have been playing wrong.

We really haven’t.

 Kharneth wrote:
I mean, we can argue about whether or not that classifies as modifying a roll, or we can assume that since there are options in the game that offer the ability to reroll a failed Ld test than it's possible to reroll.

I think that the intention is clear. Modifiers to a Leadership value are called modifiers, such as the Hemlock Wraithfighter reducing enemy Ld by -2. In such a case, if you lost 5 models and had a modifier of -2 than you'd be left with a -2 modifier, not a -7. Though, obviously this is a modifier to the Leadership value and not to the Battleshock dice roll. Are there any abilities that allow you to modify your Battleshock roll?

I believe that the Battleshock mechanic is not modifying the roll. Roll a d6 and add the number of slain models to the result isn't modifying the result, it's simply a mechanic to bring you to a number. Imagine if it was take the number of slain models an add a d6 to it.

The Chaos Space Marines Word Bearers Legion trait allows them to reroll Morale tests. Certainly you aren't suggesting that they'll never be allowed to.

Also, you are not modifying the Leadership value. You are actually modifying the result.

And based on this:
1. The number of slain models is not a modifier to the test. It is a part of the Morale Test Mechanic.
2. Modifiers to a unit's Leadership Attribute are not a modifier to the test. It is a modifier to the Attribute that happens to be used in the Test.
3. You may reroll your Morale Test if the total of the test is greater than your modified Leadership.
4. If you have a modifier to your Morale Test, you check for failure before determining if you reroll per the reroll rules.

1. It's literally a modifier to the result rolled.
2. The only waya to modify the unit's ld are bespoke abilities (ex. Night Lords).
3. Sure.
4. Wrong.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
1. It's literally a modifier to the result rolled.

No. You do not have a result until you add the number of models from the unit that have been slain that turn to the dice roll.

 Ghaz wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
1. It's literally a modifier to the result rolled.

No. You do not have a result until you add the number of models from the unit that have been slain that turn to the dice roll.

No. You get the result by rolling a d6 and adding a modifier.

And again to determine the roll, you to add the number of models from the unit that have been slain that turn to the dice roll. You don't stop halfway through the process.

To take a Morale test, roll a dice and add the number of models from the unit that have been slain this turn. If the result of the Morale test exceeds the highest Leadership characteristic in the unit, the test is failed.

The test (i.e., the roll) is D6 plus he number of models from the unit that have been slain this turn. The number is the '... result of the Morale test...'. Nothing you've quoted changes what the roll is.

You are adding a number to a roll. Ergo you are modifying a roll to get a result.

Please show what rule you're using to modify Morale tests, because you don't have a valid Morale test until you've add the number of models slain.

Because you must be able to fail to "reroll a failed Battleshock roll." Then the number of models added must not be considered a modifier.

This seems pretty pointless to argue about. The intention of the rule is perfectly clear.

Juggler is just (once again) nitpicking the phrasing of everything possible to make some kind of snide point about GW being bad at making rules.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Because you must be able to fail to "reroll a failed Battleshock roll." Then the number of models added must not be considered a modifier.

You could technically use Ld debuffs (Night Lords, phantasm grenades, etc) to make Ld tests failable.

Yeah lay off GW guys. They are an up and coming new company, 2 dudes working out of their mothers loft! They've only had -checks wikipedia- FOURTY THREE YEARS to get it right.

MagicJuggler makes a good point, and I can see that there is enough ambiguity for it to be an issue. The fact that there are so many other stupid things wrong with the rules (that aren't nitpicks, but core fundamental issues that are bizarre and intuitive) means we genuinely have no idea what the "intent" might be.

Only we know what the intent is because they wrote it, and it’s abundabtly clear to everyone. The rules also clearly describe how to take a Morale test, and it’s different to a straight-up roll with a success number. If you attempt to redefine a Morale test as just a dice roll you’re simply not following the rules - and we know you love to follow the rules, right? The number of models slain is a component of the test, not a modifier. That’s the RAW.

Wilfully misrepresenting that as ambiguous is disingenuous, and given you’ve recently berated people for being disingenuous when they were asking honest questions, BCB, I’m surprised you’re here being disingenuous about this. Wait. I’m not.

Other issues with the rules are irrelevant to this thread - pack away the soapbox, dear chap. Stay on topic.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Only we know what the intent is because they wrote it, and it’s abundabtly clear to everyone. The rules also clearly describe how to take a Morale test, and it’s different to a straight-up roll with a success number. If you attempt to redefine a Morale test as just a dice roll you’re simply not following the rules - and we know you love to follow the rules, right? The number of models slain is a component of the test, not a modifier. That’s the RAW.

Wilfully misrepresenting that as ambiguous is disingenuous, and given you’ve recently berated people for being disingenuous when they were asking honest questions, BCB, I’m surprised you’re here being disingenuous about this. Wait. I’m not.

Other issues with the rules are irrelevant to this thread - pack away the soapbox, dear chap. Stay on topic.

1000% this.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
1. It's literally a modifier to the result rolled.

The rule that you posted before making this comment quite literally refers the die roll plus the number of slain models as the result. That's not treating it as a modifier to the result.

The problem is "result" is used interchangeably to mean d6s rolled ("Some rolls refer to 2d6, 3d6 and so on. In that case, roll that many d6s and add the results together") or for the final "result." By that definition, the first d6 is a result which has casualties added to come to another result. In other words, a modification (assuming d6s are results and static numbers are modifiers; then again, modifiers are another undefined game term), unless rerolls are applied after checking for failure, which contradicts the fact that rerolls are "always" [as per the Designer Commentary] before modifers.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The problem is "result" is used interchangeably to mean d6s rolled ("Some rolls refer to 2d6, 3d6 and so on. In that case, roll that many d6s and add the results together") or for the final "result." By that definition, the first d6 is a result which has casualties added to come to another result. In other words, a modification (assuming d6s are results and static numbers are modifiers; then again, modifiers are another undefined game term), unless rerolls are applied after checking for failure, which contradicts the fact that rerolls are "always" [as per the Designer Commentary] before modifers.

The rule literally spells out the conditions of a Morale test. Just read and apply it. Trying to wedge in all this other stuff isn’t applicable.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
They are Word Bearers. It's entirely possible GW doesn't care. Is adding modifying? Let's find out.

Adding is modifying, the difference here when resolving morale compared to shooting or Close combat is that the morale rule explicitly states that you must apply this specific modifier (casualties taken) only, then check to see the result of the check and determine whether it is a pass or fail. all rerolls and other modifiers then follow the stated priority for sequencing, reroll if failed, then apply any other modifiers, such as leadership penalties.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The problem is "result" is used interchangeably to mean d6s rolled ("Some rolls refer to 2d6, 3d6 and so on. In that case, roll that many d6s and add the results together") or for the final "result." By that definition, the first d6 is a result which has casualties added to come to another result. In other words, a modification (assuming d6s are results and static numbers are modifiers; then again, modifiers are another undefined game term), unless rerolls are applied after checking for failure, which contradicts the fact that rerolls are "always" [as per the Designer Commentary] before modifers.

But in this case they explicitly define the result as being the die roll plus the number of casualties. AsJohnnyHell says, just read and apply the rule, and not try to try to subdivide it further when they've plainly stated what the result is - the dice roll plus the number of casualties.

I agree that the test itself includes the adding of the dead.

Related question: wtf is Battleshock? Is it a name for Morale checks in a different edition?

 Blndmage wrote:
I agree that the test itself includes the adding of the dead.

Related question: wtf is Battleshock? Is it a name for Morale checks in a different edition?

It’s the name in Age of Sigmar. It would be super helpful if people called 40K rules by their 40K names.