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.

There's a ton of speculation on morale and leadership in 8th. To my knowledge, no one has put this up for others to see yet. But here is how AoS handles it. I don't know if it's true, but someone said Stormcast have a "6"... so I'm guessing SM having a 7 is still pretty good.

Hopefully some AoS players can give us the ins and outs?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm hoping it's a fall back not remove from play in 40k... or roll a save to see who dies.

As Luciferian linked to below... here's the Adepticon 40k thought

"Morale

Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

This isn't really worth commenting on yet, though it does concern me that this mechanic will carry across. Though that is based on nothing, as I have never played AoS and the rest of the changes seem very positive.

It sounds like this will be one thing that's ported over word for word.

 Luciferian wrote:
It sounds like this will be one thing that's ported over word for word.

Based on what?

 Rippy wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
It sounds like this will be one thing that's ported over word for word.

Based on what?

I don't remember where it came from (probably the FAQ, maybe the Q&A) but what they described about morale was more or less that rule from AoS verbatim.

I hope this doesn't come over. Seems like it will be too easy to simply wipe units out after having killed only 2-3 of them.

 Luciferian wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
It sounds like this will be one thing that's ported over word for word.

Based on what?

I don't remember where it came from (probably the FAQ, maybe the Q&A) but what they described about morale was more or less that rule from AoS verbatim.

I have been following this very close and haven't heard them say that at all? I would be very interested in the source.

Found it:
https://youtu.be/7dl0OtWqCa0

Edit - oops, that's not it, but it came from their Adepticon announcement.

Here is a Warhammer Community post where they mention it:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/03/23/warhammer-40000-news-from-adepticon/

"Morale

Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties. "

From Adepticon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Can we have Marines without ATSKNF? Guessing ATSKNF will allow a 2k1 of the like

 Grey Templar wrote:
I hope this doesn't come over. Seems like it will be too easy to simply wipe units out after having killed only 2-3 of them.

So a SM squad loses three Marines, then rolls a six during battleshock, which is the worst possible roll, resulting in losing another two Marines.

Not exactly wiped out. Lower LD armies can suffer more, but armies in AoS generally have many ways to buff their Bravery. I would expect the same in 8th Edition 40k, including for Space Marines.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I hope this doesn't come over. Seems like it will be too easy to simply wipe units out after having killed only 2-3 of them.

So a SM squad loses three Marines, then rolls a six during battleshock, which is the worst possible roll, resulting in losing another two Marines.

Not exactly wiped out. Lower LD armies can suffer more, but armies in AoS generally have many ways to buff their Bravery. I would expect the same in 8th Edition 40k, including for Space Marines.

When you put it like this, it makes it sound a lot better in my opinion. Speed up close combat etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lobukia wrote:
"Morale

Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties. "

From Adepticon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Can we have Marines without ATSKNF? Guessing ATSKNF will allow a 2k1 of the like

Great thanks for that clarification! Hmm, this is one of the only changes I am not sure about, only time will tell!

 Grey Templar wrote:
I hope this doesn't come over. Seems like it will be too easy to simply wipe units out after having killed only 2-3 of them.

How so. most units will assumable have ld 5-6. 7 for SM so 8ish with a squad leader or so.

often losing 1 or 2 models with chip damage wont really effect them most common rolls being 7.

naturally box cars are going to wreck your gak a unit losing 4-5 models was going to get wrecked anyway more than likely.

just means its going to be worth it to take squad leaders and LD buffing things now.


also going to assume Marines will get ATSKNF and it will probably be something stupid like you dont add the number of models lost for your battle shock test or something.

In AoS there were lots of ways to make units immune to battle shock, especially in the heroic armies. In true "...And they shall know no rules" fashion I expect space marines to be immune to battle shock. Ignoring the morale aspect of the game has been Space marines "Thing" for a while, I'm sure it will continue in 8th ed. The only issue I have with battle shock is that it greatly favors small units, since with a small unit if you did enough damage to them to make battle shock a worry, you probably wiped them out. Though with alternating activations in CC big units are a boon there, so it's not entirely a one-sided thing.

If that's the route they take for leadership, this should actually make the veteran sergeant upgrade a viable option!

 Traditio wrote:
If that's the route they take for leadership, this should actually make the veteran sergeant upgrade a viable option!

assuming Vets give the unit +1 LD still

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
If that's the route they take for leadership, this should actually make the veteran sergeant upgrade a viable option!

assuming Vets give the unit +1 LD still

That is correct.

If vets no longer have +1 LD, then my comment is perfectly incorrect.

"Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

So if I have a Renegade unit with as high a LD as a marine unit in the current form, and suffer 12 casualties (Renegades are easier to kill after all) and roll a 1 (best possible result), I would STILL lose 5 models?

Green Tide loses 30 models out of 90 and precedes to lose another 25?

Sounds a way to screw horde armies and any army that relies on numbers over individual durability.

Poly Ranger wrote:
"Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

So if I have a Renegade unit with as high a LD as a marine unit in the current form, and suffer 12 casualties (Renegades are easier to kill after all) and roll a 1 (best possible result), I would STILL lose 5 models?

Green Tide loses 30 models out of 90 and precedes to lose another 25?

Sounds a way to screw horde armies and any army that relies on numbers over individual durability.

I do wish to point out that GW has claimed to be doing fairly heavy playtesting for this edition.

So while it appears that this rule punishes hordes and encourages MSU, we don't actually know this. This could well be balanced out by other factors (for example, points costs).

Fingers crossed!

I'm okay with losing models rather than breaking and retreating some random distance. Especially if there is voluntary retreat movements like in AoS so those moments you wish you would fail the roll don't have to come up.

Would be cool if they had a system where you could either lose ground to an enemy or lose models. Seems fluffy and would add a layer of player interaction besides dice rolling lacking in games like AoS. Choosing to hold to an objective despite taking extra losses or giving ground to save your troops for a counterattack seems like it should be a thing.

dosiere wrote:
Would be cool if they had a system where you could either lose ground to an enemy or lose models. Seems fluffy and would add a layer of player interaction besides dice rolling lacking in games like AoS. Choosing to hold to an objective despite taking extra losses or giving ground to save your troops for a counterattack seems like it should be a thing.

I like this, I like this a lot!

Poly Ranger wrote:
"Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

So if I have a Renegade unit with as high a LD as a marine unit in the current form, and suffer 12 casualties (Renegades are easier to kill after all) and roll a 1 (best possible result), I would STILL lose 5 models?

Green Tide loses 30 models out of 90 and precedes to lose another 25?

Sounds a way to screw horde armies and any army that relies on numbers over individual durability.

if its an exact copy of Battleshock then for every 10 models in the unit you get an additional 1 LD. Hoards in AoS can lose a lot to battleshock because they tend to have more models that end up in combat. However, numbers means that its going to be far harder to break them. Hoards also tend to have bonuses in combat for more numbers. Skaven Clanrats have generally crap stats: 6+ save, Bravery 4, hit on either a 4+ or 5+ depending on the weapon; however, if you get 30 or more of them they wound on 2s. Numbers matter.

So imagine this: Your Green Tide charges into battle with 90! models in the unit. Each gets 1 attack hits on 4s and is S4 vs the Marine T4. There is no way you are getting all 90, but you will defiantly get a substantially higher amount of hits in. Now lets apply the Clanrat style bonus to your To-Hit making it a 2+ for having over 30 models in the unit. You will kill Marines, potentially wipe a unit. Oh you charged too so you get to go first according to GWs initial announcement.

Lets flip it around and a 20 man Marine Assault unit hits you. They hit on 3s would wound on 4s. Lets say 21 attacks (+1 for the Srg and going by AoS there is no bonus attacks on the Charge) cause 10 wounds which cause 7 dead models. Orcs have a LD of 7 and your roll is a dreaded 6 so your total would be: (7LD+ 5 Model count) 12 - (7 dead + 6 roll)13 = -1
You lose one model in the test for a grand total of 8 removed models, from 90. Of course there would also be casualties from shooting to add in, but even then the Orc unit wont be hurting all that badly unless it gets really pummeled.

Hoards will be terrifying and will have staying power. In the current game if you lost 10 models from the unit you would need snake eyes to not break and if you ran that would be an initiative test. You lost? there goes ALL 90 as opposed to MAYBE a dozen. (yes I know Orks have a slightly different set of rules when needing to take LD tests)

BomBomHotdog wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
"Its no longer all or nothing, and it affects everyone. We’re thinking of replacing break tests with a simple mechanic. Roll a D6, add that to the number of models your unit has lost this turn, subtract your Leadership and take that many additional casualties."

So if I have a Renegade unit with as high a LD as a marine unit in the current form, and suffer 12 casualties (Renegades are easier to kill after all) and roll a 1 (best possible result), I would STILL lose 5 models?

Green Tide loses 30 models out of 90 and precedes to lose another 25?

Sounds a way to screw horde armies and any army that relies on numbers over individual durability.

if its an exact copy of Battleshock then for every 10 models in the unit you get an additional 1 LD. Hoards in AoS can lose a lot to battleshock because they tend to have more models that end up in combat. However, numbers means that its going to be far harder to break them. Hoards also tend to have bonuses in combat for more numbers. Skaven Clanrats have generally crap stats: 6+ save, Bravery 4, hit on either a 4+ or 5+ depending on the weapon; however, if you get 30 or more of them they wound on 2s. Numbers matter.

So imagine this: Your Green Tide charges into battle with 90! models in the unit. Each gets 1 attack hits on 4s and is S4 vs the Marine T4. There is no way you are getting all 90, but you will defiantly get a substantially higher amount of hits in. Now lets apply the Clanrat style bonus to your To-Hit making it a 2+ for having over 30 models in the unit. You will kill Marines, potentially wipe a unit. Oh you charged too so you get to go first according to GWs initial announcement.

Lets flip it around and a 20 man Marine Assault unit hits you. They hit on 3s would wound on 4s. Lets say 21 attacks (+1 for the Srg and going by AoS there is no bonus attacks on the Charge) cause 10 wounds which cause 7 dead models. Orcs have a LD of 7 and your roll is a dreaded 6 so your total would be: (7LD+ 5 Model count) 12 - (7 dead + 6 roll)13 = -1
You lose one model in the test for a grand total of 8 removed models, from 90. Of course there would also be casualties from shooting to add in, but even then the Orc unit wont be hurting all that badly unless it gets really pummeled.

Hoards will be terrifying and will have staying power. In the current game if you lost 10 models from the unit you would need snake eyes to not break and if you ran that would be an initiative test. You lost? there goes ALL 90 as opposed to MAYBE a dozen. (yes I know Orks have a slightly different set of rules when needing to take LD tests)

I was under the impression this also applies for break tests involving shooting casualties where your numbers won't help sway it back in your favour. So you get shot, lose 30 models, then lose a further 25 due to the leadership test. Using Green Tide I realise I'm using an extreme example to highlight how it is unfair towards hordes.

No one seems to be mentioning that most good horde units have some way of mitigating the effects of morale anyway. (e.g. IG priests/commissars, renegades with stubborn or fearless green tides)

In the above examples, if the unit had no LD buffs, then in CC the unit would be basically guaranteed to fall back and likely wiped in the current system. I'm interested to know if stubborn and fearless will remain, and what form they will take if they do...

 DoomMouse wrote:
No one seems to be mentioning that most good horde units have some way of mitigating the effects of morale anyway. (e.g. IG priests/commissars, renegades with stubborn or fearless green tides)

In the above examples, if the unit had no LD buffs, then in CC the unit would be basically guaranteed to fall back and likely wiped in the current system. I'm interested to know if stubborn and fearless will remain, and what form they will take if they do...

That would be fine if they kept them. It's the 'it will affect everyone' part that worries me as it seems to suggest they will either do away with fearless and stubborn or dilute them to a high degree.

The other thing that confuses me is that if you just take more casualties instead... when on earth will anyone ever fall back?

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:


Not exactly wiped out. Lower LD armies can suffer more, but armies in AoS generally have many ways to buff their Bravery. I would expect the same in 8th Edition 40k, including for Space Marines.

This. Even in the current edition the basic Space Marine has a Leadership value different from their Veteran Sergeants. Look at the difference between Space Marines and Terminators. It's there in the revealed profiles.

Poly Ranger wrote:

dosiere wrote:
Would be cool if they had a system where you could either lose ground to an enemy or lose models. Seems fluffy and would add a layer of player interaction besides dice rolling lacking in games like AoS. Choosing to hold to an objective despite taking extra losses or giving ground to save your troops for a counterattack seems like it should be a thing.

I like this, I like this a lot!

Same actually!

@dosiere, can you please email GW? I know it is probably too late for changes, but that is a great idea!!

Battleshock is not 2d6. Its 1d6. You're also not going to be bringing in 90 models in a unit. In AOS the tournament profiles cap your max unit size out to 40-50.

The system is not meant to be a simulation and you do not "fall back" anymore. You have guys leave the battle as they lose their morale. Kind of like a real battle, instead of it being all or nothing.

Also you have a retreat mechanism in AOS that you can use to disengage from combat .

Your missing one very important rule in that Battleshock rule.

Your General of your army has an ability called Inspiring Presence. During the Hero phase they may choose one unit in their army that is immune to battleshock that turn.

That allows the general to choose the unit that looks like it might take heavy casualties and say, they will be immune this turn.