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.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Take it off units like Tau drones. Those shouldn't have emotions so fear shouldn't be a factor imo

3rd Law of Robotics.

Morale doesn't just represent fear. It also represents being overrun.

I think what is wrong with morale is that it feels like it has a large impact on a very small number of armies/units, and a negligible/no impact on the vast majority of armies/units.

Morale seems to have been 'streamlined'/dumbed down severely over the editions (along with most other mechanics) to the point where, if we want to 'fix' it, we need to know what its purpose is.

To look at how rarely morale comes in to effect (in my experience):
* Morale means nothing for units of a single model, a category including nearly all vehicles, characters and monsters.
* A large number of armies field units of <=5 models that either can only lose models in very rare circumstances (eg lose exactly 4 out of 5 models then roll a double 6 for Ld).
* Squads which are commonly fielded in 10s (eg Guardsmen or Kabalites) are cheap table filler that doesn't really matter if it dies, and even then the circumstances are rare for a significant number of models to flee.
* The majority of Horde units are immune or effectively immune to morale (Boyz, 'Nids, Cultists in any sensible setup)


The only army I can think of that regularly loses significant numbers of models from morale is Daemons - with low LD across the board and being encouraged to run units of 20 or 30 models which die easily, it can be an issue for them. Even then, the troops can get some immunity (rolling a 1 for Ld when you have a banner) but it is random rather than controlled.

And compared to previous editions, this is very different. The game used to be such that there was a morale balance between large cheap (and easy to kill) units and small elite (hard to kill) units - you had to lose 25% of the unit. In-game, Hordes 'expected' to have a lot of their dudes die so it didn't effect them as much.

Now I know 8th is a different beast to 3rd-7th, but I think it drives home the point: if you want to 'fix' morale there needs to be a clear mission behind the morale mechanic, which I think is currently lacking from 8th.

Trasvi wrote:
I think what is wrong with morale is that it feels like it has a large impact on a very small number of armies/units, and a negligible/no impact on the vast majority of armies/units.

Morale seems to have been 'streamlined'/dumbed down severely over the editions (along with most other mechanics) to the point where, if we want to 'fix' it, we need to know what its purpose is.

To look at how rarely morale comes in to effect (in my experience):
* Morale means nothing for units of a single model, a category including nearly all vehicles, characters and monsters.
* A large number of armies field units of <=5 models that either can only lose models in very rare circumstances (eg lose exactly 4 out of 5 models then roll a double 6 for Ld).
* Squads which are commonly fielded in 10s (eg Guardsmen or Kabalites) are cheap table filler that doesn't really matter if it dies, and even then the circumstances are rare for a significant number of models to flee.
* The majority of Horde units are immune or effectively immune to morale (Boyz, 'Nids, Cultists in any sensible setup)


The only army I can think of that regularly loses significant numbers of models from morale is Daemons - with low LD across the board and being encouraged to run units of 20 or 30 models which die easily, it can be an issue for them. Even then, the troops can get some immunity (rolling a 1 for Ld when you have a banner) but it is random rather than controlled.

And compared to previous editions, this is very different. The game used to be such that there was a morale balance between large cheap (and easy to kill) units and small elite (hard to kill) units - you had to lose 25% of the unit. In-game, Hordes 'expected' to have a lot of their dudes die so it didn't effect them as much.

Now I know 8th is a different beast to 3rd-7th, but I think it drives home the point: if you want to 'fix' morale there needs to be a clear mission behind the morale mechanic, which I think is currently lacking from 8th.

I think I want to bring up how fearlessness was specifically handled in previous editions. A fearless unit would never "Fail" a leadership check and start running off the board as a result, but if they lost models in close combat they'd have to lose models to being overrun. This was a really nice balance between immunity and vulnerability - Your 30-strong horde of Boyz or Nidz didn't have to worry about running away because of shooting, but if they got stuck in they wouldn't be able to sit in combat for the rest of the game against a more powerful foe. Against units with poor saves, this nearly doubled the damage they took in combat, assuming that they lost the fight - Meaning that it was highly inadvisable to get stuck in with an enemy unless you thought you had a good chance of winning. (Terminators and the like were still vulnerable, but less so, which makes sense - A unit clad in advanced power armor is less likely to get overrun.)

That used to be the tradeoff - Leadership meant a smallish chance of losing the entire unit, Fearlessness meant a larger chance of losing just a couple models.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Take it off units like Tau drones. Those shouldn't have emotions so fear shouldn't be a factor imo

No. There are plenty of ways to justify Morale for units like Drones or Necrons. One of the biggest problems with Morale at the moment is the number of things that ignore it completely. We need fewer of those, not more. I'd argue nothing should ignore Morale, in fact.

Morale (or more importantly, failing the test) basically means that you have abandoned what you were trying to do, and are now just trying to survive. For some units, this means running or hiding, for others it would mean attacking. Fight or flight, I suppose.

Now obviously this will have different effects in shooting and fighting, as they are very different things. if your mates head explodes 200 yards from the enemy, the correct response is not to charge at them!

I dislike the mysteriously vanishing soldiers approach to morale, I liked having a unit that was fleeing and I had the slightest hope of double-1-ing it and getting them back in the game.

So, my suggested responses are:

1: pinning
2: fleeing
3: Fighting

1 would be used for shooting. if you fail a morale check for being shot, you are pinned. gain 1 to save, and you can't move or shoot next turn.
2 would be a response to being charged or losing more than 50% of the unit (nice and easy, as it's "more models than are left"). move & advance, towards your board edge.
3 would be for combat only, and would simply prevent your unit from disengaging from combat if you fail. Perhaps give +1 attack and -1 to hit, to represent their more frantic attempts to survive. This would only apply to certain units, like possessed, bezerkers, orks, tyranids - all the CC units who's best bet is to kill the enemy, not run.

All of these need fleshing out, and I thing the "Fight" one needs a casualty system (like now, but the models who die get a round of attacks before they are removed, perhaps?).

I also think outnumbering needs to be back. 3 terminators vs 30 orks, the terminators need to have some effect.

Perhaps also have a -1 to morale checks if you did no damage this round, as that will be very disheartening!