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.

I just figured out what was bothering me about No Retreat!

1. It can make Fearless a liability.
2. It makes unmodifiable leadership more good in comparison.
3. So many questions about what is and isn't subject to the rule.
4. Somehow an automatically passed leadership test is different from a passed leadership test. This is the big one, for me. How is insane bravery any different from actual fearlessness?

The purpose of No Retreat! is to reduce the tendency of fearless combatants to tie up the board center the whole game. You can still do that, you just need unmodifiable high leadership or shear good luck to do it. With that in mind, I bring this modification:

A unit that loses a combat and does not fall back suffers a number of wounds equal to the amount it lost combat by. Saving throws other than cover saves still apply, and wounds are not allocated to any models that can not be harmed by any of the opposing models in the combat.


I realise this makes assaults even more decisive than before and leaves assaulty hordes gimped as before. The inelegance of the rule as it is written was just bugging me.

One of the few rules that left me scratching my head...