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.

 

ADVANCED MORALE RULES 2.2

<?xml:namespace prefix = o />  

MORALE

The following changes have been made to the Morale section on page 47 of the rulebook.

 

A unit may now be forced to take multiple Morale checks in a single shooting phase. For all these checks, an additional -1 Ld modifier is assessed if the unit is under 50% of its starting strength:

 

A1) Casualties: The standard Morale check for losing 25% casualties in a single Shooting phase. See page 47 of the rulebook for details. This check is taken at the end of the Shooting phase.

 

A2) Suppression: If a unit is fired at by an enemy unit, and the enemy rolls more ?to hit? dice than there are total wounds remaining in the target unit, it then takes an immediate Morale check after that enemy unit?s shooting is resolved. Monstrous Creatures always count as having ten wounds remaining for this purpose.

If a weapon does not use a ?to hit? die (such as with an Ordnance or Template weapon), add the total number of models hit by these weapons to the ?to hit? dice total.

If a weapon uses a ?to hit? die, but a successful roll causes multiple hits (such as with a Blast weapon), ignore the initial ?to hit? die (only if successful) and instead add the total number of models hit by these weapons to the ?to hit? dice total.

 

A3) Pinning: If a unit suffers a casualty from a weapon with the Pinning ability it takes an immediate Morale check after that enemy unit?s shooting is resolved.

 

 

Although a unit can suffer multiple morale checks from a multitude of sources in a single shooting phase, once a unit actually Falls Back it does not take any more Morale Checks that phase.

 

A unit Falling Back from a previous phase may be forced to take a Morale check, in which case it suffers an additional -1 Ld modifier. A unit Falling Back that fails a Morale check is removed from the table and its models are treated as casualties. No form of special rule can be used to stop this fate or allow the unit to return to play (as they aren?t actually dead; they?ve just run from the battle).

 

 

FALL BACK!

The Fall Back rules on page 48 of the rulebook are modified in the following ways:

 

In all cases, Fall Back moves are no longer affected by Difficult Terrain.

 

A unit that is called upon to Fall Back but is in cover (see below) does not Fall Back. Instead, it becomes Suppressed (see definition below). Models in the unit that are not within or behind (and in base contact with) cover may immediately consolidate up to 3? before becoming Suppressed. This move may only be made if it will take a model inside or behind cover and not within 6? of an enemy model. Consolidation movement is unaffected by Difficult Terrain.

 

For Fall Back purposes, a unit counts as being in cover only if:

 

A)   It is not within 6? of an enemy model.

 

B)      The majority of its models are inside or in base contact with cover.

 

C)   No enemy model on the table can draw a clear line of sight (it doesn?t pass through any cover) to the majority of models in the unit.

 

A unit that is called upon to Fall Back but is not in cover can make their Fall Back move in any direction provided the move will make the unit in cover.

 

A Falling Back unit that cannot get in cover with its Fall Back movement instead Falls Back as dictated by page 48 of the rulebook (towards their table edge, baseline, or direction specified by the mission). A player may always opt to Fall Back a unit this way if they wish; even if it could have gotten in cover with its Fall Back movement.

 

Failing a Morale Check in the Shooting Phase

A unit that fails a Morale check in the shooting phase is said to be Falling Back. Turn the models in the unit backwards to show that they are Falling Back. Once Falling Back, a unit does not have to take any further Morale checks that phase. The actual Fall Back movement is performed at the end of the phase. A unit may only ever make one Fall Back move per phase.

 

Falling Back out of an Assault

A unit locked in an Assault that Falls Back always does so as dictated by page 48 of the rulebook (towards their table edge, baseline, or direction specified by the mission); they may not choose to Fall Back into cover. If the unit continues to Fall Back in subsequent turns, it may then Fall Back into cover if it chooses. 

 

 

REGROUPING

The following rules are added to the Regrouping rules on page 49 of the rulebook:

 

A unit which spends its entire player turn Suppressed automatically regroups at the end of that turn, even if it would not normally be able to regroup.

 

Units which regroup in this way do not get a Consolidation move.

 

 

BEING SUPPRESSED

A unit which is in cover that is called upon to Fall Back becomes Suppressed instead. A unit which Falls Back into cover also immediately becomes Suppressed (but without the Consolidation move).

 

A Suppressed unit gains +1 to its cover save up to a maximum of a 2+ cover save.

 

A Suppressed unit may not move, shoot, assault or take any other action until the end of that player?s following turn. A Suppressed unit does not have to take any Morale checks. If assaulted by the enemy, the Suppressed effect is immediately cancelled and the unit will fight normally.

 

 

PINNING WEAPONS

The Pinning rules from page 32 of the rulebook are completely superceded by these rules.

 

A unit which suffers a casualty from a weapon with the Pinning ability takes an immediate Morale check. This is in addition to any other Morale checks that may be caused by shooting.

 

Ordnance Barrages cause an additional -1 Ld modifier to the Pinning Morale check.

 

Special rules that cause a unit to take a Pinning test or to become automatically Pinned instead cause a Pinning Morale check. Units locked in combat do not have to take a Pinning Morale check.

 

 

FIXING MORALE ONE ARMY AT A TIME

Combatants with some sense get their heads DOWN when the lead starts flying. When a unit starts to take fire, its members tend to run for cover and hit the ground. However, many creatures in the 41^st millennium simply aren?t that sensible and wading through bullets will eventually take its toll. Many of the rules in this section take this fact into account.

 

The rest of the rules are just a personal attempt to adjust the Morale rules in 40K to make them an important factor again.

 

 

FEARLESS UNITS & UNITS THAT AUTOMATICALLY PASS LD TESTS

Fearless units or any unit that automatically passes Ld tests must still take Morale checks in the shooting phase (but only from the A1-A3 Morale checks presented above). If the check is failed, instead of Falling Back, the unit takes one wound with no save of any kind possible.

 

This wound counts as a shooting casualty and is allocated using the normal casualty removal rules (including the mixed armor rule if applicable).

 

MORALE CHECK RE-ROLLS & SECONDARY TESTS

Anytime a unit fails a Morale check in the shooting phase (only from the A1-A3 Morale checks presented above), but successfully passes the test due to any kind of re-roll or because of a special secondary test (such as an Ork size check), it suffers a single automatic wound with no saves of any kind allowed.

 

This wound counts as a shooting casualty and is allocated using the normal casualty removal rules (including the mixed armor rule if applicable).

 

 

SPACE MARINES AND ATSKNF

1)      The following rule fully replaces the ATSKNF universal special rule in the rulebook:

 

Units with ATSKNF may re-roll any failed Morale and Last Man Standing test. Units with ATSKNF may always attempt to regroup, ignoring any and all restrictions.

 

2)      The Force Commander?s Rites of Battle only applies to those units that have a model within 18? of him instead of anywhere on the table.

 

3)      Black Templars do not take Suppression (A2) Morale checks. Instead of taking the test, the unit takes one automatic wound. Saves may be made as normal.

 

In addition, a Black Templar unit never becomes Suppressed and if it Falls Forward due to failing a Morale check (A1 or A3) then it takes an automatic wound with no save allowed.

 

Both of these wounds count as a shooting casualty and are allocated using the normal casualty removal rules (including the mixed armor rule if applicable).

 

 

TYRANIDS

1)      Units within range of the Synapse power that automatically pass a shooting Morale Check may suffer a casualty as explained above.

 

 

TAU

1)      The Ethereal?s Inspiring Presence only applies to those units within 24? instead of anywhere on the battlefield.

2)      If an Ethereal is killed only those units within 24? must test due to Price of Failure.

 

 

CHAOS SPACE MARINES

1)      Chaos Marks besides Khorne no longer grant Fearlessness. Instead, they allow marked units to re-roll failed Morale and Last Man Standing checks.

2)      Daemon units that suffer from Daemonic Instability do not take any additional casualties per the secondary test rules above.

3)      Any other item (or unit) in the Codex which gives/has Fearlessness remains unaltered (such as Obliterators being Fearless). Only the Chaos marks have been changed.

 

 

IMPERIAL GUARD

1)      Due to the increase in Morale checks taken by units, the following change is made to Vox-Casters: If a Command HQ or Command Squad has a Vox-Caster then one squad per turn that also has a Vox-Caster may use the Leadership value of the Officer for all Leadership tests made that turn. This effect is lost if the unit using the Officer?s Leadership fails a Leadership test. Note that the Vox-Caster may not be used if either unit is locked in close combat.

2)      Master-Vox: If a Command HQ has a Master-Vox then any number of squads with a Vox-Caster may use the Leadership of the HQ?s Officer for any number of Leadership tests in a single turn, provided that neither unit is engaged in close combat. This effect may be used until a squad using the Officer?s Leadership fails a Leadership test. After that, no more units may use the Command HQ Officer?s Leadership through the Master-Vox that turn.

3)      A Commissar?s Summary Execution already inflicts a stiff penalty. No additional casualties are suffered due to the secondary test rules above.

 

 

NECRONS

1)      Units classified as Necrons do not take Suppression (A2) Morale checks. Instead of taking the test, the unit takes one automatic wound. Saves may be made as normal.

 

This wound counts as a shooting casualty and is allocated using the normal casualty removal rules (including the mixed armor rule if applicable).

 

2)      All wounds inflicted by the Morale rules may be repaired via We?ll Be Back! Even if they don?t allow an armor save.

 

 

ORKS

1)      An Ork unit which fails an Assault Morale check but passes a size check counts as Fearless for the No Retreat! rule.

 

2)      Speed Freeks never become Pinned and always fall back using their own special rules in the Armageddon Codex.

 

 

WITCH HUNTERS

1)      Units that automatically pass a shooting Morale Check using the Light of the Emperor Act of Faith may suffer a casualty as explained above.

 

2)      Sisters Repentia never become Suppressed and if they fall forward due to Righteous Zeal will suffer one wound with no save possible.

 

This wound counts as a shooting casualty and is allocated using the normal casualty removal rules (including the mixed armor rule if applicable).

 

3)      Inquisitor Lord units that use Iron Will to automatically pass a shooting Morale Check may suffer a casualty as explained above. If Iron Will is used to automatically pass an Assault Morale Check, the unit counts as Fearless for the No Retreat! rule.

 

 

DAEMONHUNTERS

1)      Inquisitor Lord units that use Iron Will to automatically pass a shooting Morale Check may suffer a casualty as explained above. If Iron Will is used to automatically pass an Assault Morale Check, the unit counts as Fearless for the No Retreat! rule.

 

 

FEARLESS UNITS & UNITS THAT AUTOMATICALLY PASS LD TESTS

Fearless units or any unit that automatically passes Ld tests must still take Morale checks in the shooting phase (but only from the A1-A3 Morale checks presented above). If the check is failed, instead of Falling Back, the unit takes one wound with no save of any kind possible.

<?  

This wound counts as a shooting casualty and is allocated using the normal casualty removal rules (including the mixed armor rule if applicable).

 

 

I like the rules overall but this is kind of wierd.

 

Lets say you have a Zoanthrope in a Nid army. Lets say I have a squad of IG with a Lascannon. I shoot the zoanthrope with the Lascannon and my lasguns, the Lasconnon wounds and nothing else does. Zoanthrope fails that leadership and now takes a wound. That sucks.

 

Even better, a group of grots and slaver fire at a Carnifex. The missle wounds, does it still take a wound from the grot guns that cannot hurt it since they do still fire against it?

 

I see what you are going for but I see a big problem in certain situations. I can now just fire my lasguns at a Carnifex in synapse range in the hopes that he failes his leadership.

What do you think about a certain # of shooting attacks against a squad causing a fearsome morale check regardless of how many casualties are suffered? (Exception for fearless units)

To make myself a little more clear, my concern is that combined with this rule:

 

A2) Suppression: If a unit is fired at by an enemy unit, and the enemy rolls more ?to hit? dice than there are models in the unit, it then takes an immediate Morale check after that enemy unit?s shooting is resolved.

 

The automatic wound on a fail would hurt small numbered but fearless squads. Have you run into problems with this in actual play?

 

The editor won't let me fix the first post correctly or I would have just edited it.

I think allowing a save on the automatic wounds would be better. Even so, high toughness troops get the shaft. This needs looking at IMHO. Yes, Fearless and rerolling Morale are too good right now; but these rules make them a liability.

I do like the pinning stuff though!

Strangelooper and Snoogums:

What you may be overlooking is that for Fearless troops you have to take and fail a Morale check before the unit suffers an automatic wound. Since every Fearless unit has a Leadership of 10, a failure is a very rare occurance; even if the unit takes 5 tests in a shooting phase it is more than likely they will not fail any of them (and therefore suffer no additional rules).

The reason there is no save allowed against these wounds is because they are so infrequent. If a save was allowed, the rule might as well not exist. Ld10 means that failures are few and far between.

Besides, the point of these rules is to give consequence to units that effectively ignore morale. Their basic benefit is that they will never run away and you can always count on them to be where you need them to be. The negative (with these rules) is that standing in the middle of a firefight occasionally means ricohets or stray blasts will result in extra casualties.


@Snoogums: I think I may change the rule so that the total number of 'to hit' dice has to beat the total number of WOUNDS in the unit (instead of just models), and specify that weapons out of range do not count towards this total.

As for weapons that can't technically hurt the unit. . .well I thought long and hard but the point of this rule is to represent that even if a lasgun can't usually hurt a Carnifex, if enough of them fire eventually a little bit of damage will result as the Carnifex wades through the fire.

There is absolutely no doubt that these rules make Fearless troops weaker, but that was the point. You also have to remember that these rules also have an effect on nearly every army type. So you just can't think about the negative effects towards one particular army without considering how they also effect the opposing army too.

I like changing it to wounds for the target unit instead of models. More consistant with how multiwound model units are handled. I would propose one change.

Models that are individuals (either by being the last model in a unit, or by being the sole model at the beginning) cannot lose their last wound as a result of not running away when they fail a morale check from fearless, a re-roll or ATSKNF. The unit will count as destroyed at the end of the battle. The fanaticism of the unit allows them to continue to fight until they are either killed as normal or the battle ends.

Opponent still gets the VPs for killing them, they don't lose a model to fire that normally shouldn't have killed it and it can still do damage. It was pretty close to a dead unit anyway if there was 1 wound left or 1 model, so the loss of VPs is a fair exchange for having the model still able to contribute even though it should be dead from the morale check.
The unit is still penalised for being able to ignore running away, but the owner can actually feel like he's not getting hosed for taking a unit that should be constantly moving forward to kill the enemy and have it killed by an opponent simply forcing so many checks on it that it eventually falls to the failed tests. My last 2 opponents were Templars, and with these rules they would have actually had to have made closer to 10 checks a turn instead of 5 (suppressive fire + fearsome). They both failed at least 3 checks per game thanks to the sheer volume of checks.

Whoops, didn't notice the 'must fail LD check' under Fearless - that makes it reasonable, actually. My bad.
And the wound on a re-rolled LD check is reasonable, since you don't take the wound if you pass your first check.

However, there's still this:

TYRANIDS 1) Units within range of the Synapse power that automatically pass a shooting Morale Check will suffer a casualty as explained above.

Ouch. So, my Zoanthrope unit of 1 model with a 2+ save, will *always* die to a mere two remnant squads of 5 guardsmen each, plinking at it with Lasguns? Just because the Zoey autopasses his morale check? Seems rough.

Might I suggest replacing that by "Tyranids: Units within range of the Synapse power are Fearless. Refer to the rules for Fearless to determine if they take wounds" ie They have to FAIL their LD test to take wounds. So LD5 gaunts will be dropping like flies to rapidfire (as they should) but the LD10 Zoeys, Fexes, etc. only take wounds if they fail their test. That seems more reasonable.


I like counting wounds instead of models. I would also suggest using the 'outnumbering' correction from the assault rules, for MCs. That is, an MC counts as 10 models, so you need to paste it with more than 10 shots rather than 4 or 5).

I notice that there's no provision for extra effects on vehicles, which I like - vehicles are too fragile right now anyways, and they *should* be good at shrugging off masses of small arms fire.

Thanks for the suggestions guys. I like them both and I've edited the original and made the changes:

Total wounds in a unit are used to determine supression, and Monstrous Creatures always count as having ten wounds remaining for these purposes.


@ Snoogums: You misunderstand what I wrote (I just needed to re-phrase it). Tyranids under synapse who auto-pass a Ld test will take a wound AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. The Fearless section is also called "units that automatically pass Ld tests". They both follow the same rule: They still take shooting morale checks and if they fail the test they take an automatic wound with no save.

So what you were suggesting is already how I have it written. It just wasn't clear enough. I changed the terminology to "may" take a wound as described above to make it more clear.


@ Midnight: I toyed around with trying to write in the "may not lose the last wound" rule, but it just added another exception and more clutter. And honestly, one guy running around on his own is going to be more vulnerable to enemy fire than in any other circumstance. He has no one to watch his back.

I get what you're saying, but remember that to take a wound with no save the unit is going to have to have fail it's morale check first. I know that's not that hard in many cases, but it doesn't translate into a last man being wiped out just by being fired at.

I'll think about it some more, though. . .

Heh, I totally didn't get that you intended Nids in Synapse to only take a wound on a FAILED LD test. That's great, that all works fine now..

However, the 'as explained above' is still a bit ambiguous - as there are the "ATSKNF" and "Units that Reroll Morale" as well as "Fearless and Units that Auto-Pass" sections above the Tyranid section.

I realize (now) that synapse "obviously" falls under 'units that autopass'; however, long experience in the YMTC forum has taught me that specific wording is important. I'd still directly reference the "Fearless Units and Units that Automatically Pass LD Tests" section to be absolutely clear, if I were you.

Perhaps:
Tyranids: 1) Units in range of the Synapse power: see the "Fearless Units & Units that Automatically Pass LD Tests" section to determine if they take wounds.



I really like these rules, I'll have to test them out. I mostly wonder how my Nids will do, though the Death Guard will be interesting too.

I'm wondering if Marks of Nurgle, Slaanesh and Tzeentch might be better represented with ATSKNF, rather than a Rerollable Morale. As it stands, a unit with one of those Marks at <50% can never rally...seems wrong when a god of Chaos holds the strings to your soul...

@ Midnight: I toyed around with trying to write in the "may not lose the last wound" rule, but it just added another exception and more clutter. And honestly, one guy running around on his own is going to be more vulnerable to enemy fire than in any other circumstance. He has no one to watch his back.

I get what you're saying, but remember that to take a wound with no save the unit is going to have to have fail it's morale check first. I know that's not that hard in many cases, but it doesn't translate into a last man being wiped out just by being fired at.

I'll think about it some more, though. . .

I too didn't see the ld test at first, but I would seriously do it anyway. Does this also affect all on your own tests? Because if so, that can be harsh. You paid for the guy to be fearless or have that re-roll and now he dies when he should be running forward. The berzerkers may get fearless and +1 attack but they pay for it and also get blood rage (which is a liability ofen enough, trust me).

Snoogums wrote:
I'm wondering if Marks of Nurgle, Slaanesh and Tzeentch might be better represented with ATSKNF, rather than a Rerollable Morale. As it stands, a unit with one of those Marks at <50% can never rally...seems wrong when a god of Chaos holds the strings to your soul...

Well, it is to differentiate the loyalist marine and the chaos one. The Chaos marine has no qualms about leaving his brothers behind to save his own hide (at least that's how the rules are now). . .it's just that the marked chaos marines are supposedly so warped by Chaos they never run.

Well, I personally don't think that concept fits Deathguard, Noise Marines and Thousand Sons. A re-rollable Ld9 (or 10 with an Aspiring Champion) is pretty darn steadfast, and I personally can see selfish reasons why all those types of marines would fall back in some situations.

Essentially I think that only bloodthirsty brainless warriors (or those fueled by an outside source) should be Fearless. If you disagree but like the rest of the rules, feel free to keep all Marked Troops Fearless.

The other important thing to note is that if a unit falls back into cover in these rules they become pinned and then automatically regroup at the end of the turn of pinning. So units that are below 50% can indeed regroup (provided they get into cover) with my morale rules.

Midnight wrote:
I too didn't see the ld test at first, but I would seriously do it anyway. Does this also affect all on your own tests? Because if so, that can be harsh. You paid for the guy to be fearless or have that re-roll and now he dies when he should be running forward. The berzerkers may get fearless and +1 attack but they pay for it and also get blood rage (which is a liability ofen enough, trust me).

Last Man Standing is not technically listed as a Morale check in the rulebook so as such it would not ever inflict any additional wounds if failed. Units that fail it would be allowed to fall back into cover per my rules though.

I was confused there for a bit when yakface said I suggested something but it appears that I have been confused with Strangeloper! I like Strangeloper's ideas though so I can take credit if I need to

Damn! Too many names starting with 'S's.


My apologies.

Hey Yakface: a lot to respond to here. Good start, and certainly looks sensible and balanced.

 

<?xml:namespace prefix = o />

A unit may now be forced to take multiple Morale checks in a single shooting phase. For all these checks, a[n additional]-1 Ld modifier is assessed if the unit is under 50% of its starting strength:

 

A2) Suppression: If a unit is fired at by an enemy unit, and the enemy rolls more ?to hit? dice than there are total wounds remaining in the target unit, it then takes an immediate Morale check after that enemy unit?s shooting is resolved. Monstrous Creatures always count as having ten wounds remaining for this purpose.

If an Ordnance, blast or template weapon is used, also count the total number of models actually hit by the marker(s) and add that number to the ?to hit? dice total. [I would recommend successful hits, rather than 'to hit' dice rolled ? there are a number of weapons that 'inflict D6 hits' and so forth. It also reduces the amount of morale checks units are likely to take. While you want to increase the importance of morale, you don't want to overegg the pudding. Also, is this just in the shooting phase? There are a few weapons and psychic powers etc that either fire outside of the shooting phase, or are used in the shooting phase but are not actually 'fired' as such.]

 

A unit Falling Back from a previous phase may be forced to take a Morale check; in which case it suffers an additional -1 Ld modifier. A unit Falling Back that fails a Morale check is removed from the table as casualties. No form of special rule can be used to stop this fate or allow the unit to return to play (as they aren?t actually dead; they?ve just run from the battle). [Cripes, this seems very harsh indeed... a sniper rifle shooting at a falling back mob of ten orks removes them on the roll of 4 or less! LD7, -1 fearsome, -1 below half strength, -1 falling back. Couldn't you remove D6/D3 casualties or something?]

 

A unit that is called upon to Fall Back but is in cover (see below) does not Fall Back. Instead, it becomes Pinned (see the new definition below). Models in the unit that are not within or behind (and in base contact with) cover may immediately consolidate up to 3? before becoming Pinned. This move may only be made if it will take the model inside or behind cover and not within 6? of an enemy model.[The way you have phrased in cover makes this bold text superfluous. Replace with 'if it takes the unit in cover'?] Consolidation movement is unaffected by Difficult Terrain.

 

For Fall Back purposes, a unit counts as being in cover only if:

 

A)    it is not within 6? of an enemy model [I can't help feeling that there are some grey areas with this rule ? such as enemy jet pack moves and other weird out of sequence movements... perhaps '...of an enemy model at the end of the unit's fall back move'?] and

 

B)     it has a majority of its models within or behind (and in base contact with) cover in relation to every enemy unit on the table that has line of sight to them. [Perhaps rephrase to 'no enemy model can draw line of sight to any model in the unit, except line of sight drawn through cover'?]

 

Failing a Morale Check in the Shooting Phase

A unit that fails a Morale check in the shooting phase is said to be Falling Back. Turn the models in the unit backwards to show that they are Falling Back. Once Falling Back, a unit does not have to take any further Morale checks that phase. The actual Fall Back movement is performed at the end of the phase. A unit may only ever make one Fall Back move per phase. [Very sensible]

   

BEING PINNED [I don't see why you're using this term ? it's confusing, since most gamers are familiar with the rulebook definition of pinning. Perhaps change it to 'Supressed', or somesuch, and return 'pinning' to its original meaning.]

A unit which is in cover that is called upon to Fall Back becomes [supressed] instead. A unit which Falls Back into cover also immediately becomes [supressed] (but without the Consolidation move).

 

A [supressed] unit gains +1 to its cover save up to a maximum of a 2+ cover save. [This seems a little pointless to me.]

 

A [supressed] unit may not move, shoot, assault or take any other action until the end of that player?s following turn. A [supressed] unit does not have to take any Morale checks. If assaulted by the enemy, the pinning effect is immediately cancelled and the unit will fight normally.

 

 

FEARSOME WEAPONS

The Pinning rules from page 32 of the rulebook are completely superceded by these rules. Any weapon which currently has the Pinning ability now replaces that ability with the Fearsome ability.[Again, why change definitions that already exist? It just makes it more likely to dissuade people from using these rules.]

 

A unit which suffers a casualty from a weapon with the [pinning] ability takes an immediate Morale check. This is in addition to any other Morale checks that may be caused by shooting.

 

Ordnance Barrages cause an additional -1 Ld modifier to the [pinning] Morale check.

 

Special rules that cause pinning (or cause a unit to take a pinning check) force a fearsome morale check instead.[You can delete this if you return the meaning to the original]

 

FEARLESS UNITS & UNITS THAT AUTOMATICALLY PASS LD TESTS

Fearless units or any unit that automatically passes Ld tests must still take Morale checks in the shooting phase (but only from the A1-A3 Morale checks presented above). If the check is failed, instead of Falling Back, the unit takes one wound with no save of any kind possible.

 

This wound counts as a shooting casualty and is allocated using the normal casualty removal rules (including the mixed armor rule if applicable). [I would remove this clause for simplicity's sake. Imagine a half-strength unit of 4 Khorne berzerkers. One dies to a sniper rifle hit; meaning that two morale checks are made (one for a 'fearsome' weapon, one for the casualty). If this result in one more dying, then the remaining two in the unit take a further unsaveable casualty... quite a complicated system!] 

 

MORALE CHECK RE-ROLLS & SECONDARY TESTS

Anytime a unit fails a Morale check in the shooting phase (only from the A1-A3 Morale checks presented above), but successfully passes the test due to any kind of re-roll or because of a special secondary test (such as an Ork size check), it suffers a single automatic wound with no saves of any kind allowed.

 

This wound counts as a shooting casualty and is allocated using the normal casualty removal rules (including the mixed armor rule if applicable).

[What is your thinking behind this?] 

As a halfway house between the different interpretations of Chaos Space Marine Cults, why not 'May re-roll failed morale checks and last man standing tests. In addition, [the model/unit/etc] always uses its base LD value. No modifiers are ever applied, regardless of source.'?

Cpl_Saint wrote:
I would recommend successful hits, rather than 'to hit' dice rolled ? there are a number of weapons that 'inflict D6 hits' and so forth. It also reduces the amount of morale checks units are likely to take. While you want to increase the importance of morale, you don't want to overegg the pudding. Also, is this just in the shooting phase? There are a few weapons and psychic powers etc that either fire outside of the shooting phase, or are used in the shooting phase but are not actually 'fired' as such.

The idea is basically stolen from Epic and simply represents the fact that if units get shot at (even if the fire isn't particularly accurate) they will tend to get their head down. I wanted armies with poor BS to have the same chance to suppress enemy units. Having a bunch of guys shooting is enough to accomplish this. Imagine twenty Orks firing Shootas at a unit of Ten Guardsmen. Although in the game on average only 6-7 shots will actually hit, in game "reality" that much firepower would be kicking up a tremendous amount of debris and smoke.

You do make a good point about weapons that cause multiple hits, but I think it would be better to include a special proviso for those types of weapons instead of changing the rule altogether.

As for how much is too much, I guess it depends on your perspective as a gamer. I personally don't mind taking a morale check each time a unit is shot at. You get used to it and becomes second nature. The alternative, IMO is to place some sort of supression marker next to the unit (like Epic). As 40K seems to try to steer away from keeping counters next to units, I went with additional morale tests.

BTW, yes, these additional checks are just for the shooting phase. If some wierd weapon or power is used in the movement or assault phase then it would only cause a morale check if it had it's own special rules to do so (just like now).

Cripes, this seems very harsh indeed... a sniper rifle shooting at a falling back mob of ten orks removes them on the roll of 4 or less! LD7, -1 fearsome, -1 below half strength, -1 falling back. Couldn't you remove D6/D3 casualties or something?

The simple reality is that nearly every expensive unit is already fearless or has special rules to prevent it from falling back. Only a weaker (cheaper) units are really going to be subject to this situation. In the situation you describe the ten Orks would have to fail the initial Ld7 test, and then fail their size check in order to be wiped out. If they did fail the morale check and then passed their size check, the mob would suffer a casualty.

The way you have phrased in cover makes this bold text superfluous. Replace with 'if it takes the unit in cover'?

Good point, I'll change it.

I can't help feeling that there are some grey areas with this rule ? such as enemy jet pack moves and other weird out of sequence movements... perhaps '...of an enemy model at the end of the unit's fall back move'?

What you have to remember is that this also applies when just defining if a unit is "in cover" or not. A unit isn't considered "in cover" if it is within 6" of an enemy and would have to fall back. I guess there could be some wierd timing questions regarding movement that happens at the end of the phase, so perhaps I'll add some text clarifying when exactly this happens.

Perhaps rephrase to 'no enemy model can draw line of sight to any model in the unit, except line of sight drawn through cover'?

Great suggestion. I'll change it.

I don't see why you're using this term ? it's confusing, since most gamers are familiar with the rulebook definition of pinning. Perhaps change it to 'Supressed', or somesuch, and return 'pinning' to its original meaning.

You make a good point, and perhaps I'll change it back. The problem is that in my system "pinning" weapons don't pin. I never liked the concept of having units get stuck out in the open when shot by a sniper rifle. Since all morale can make units run for cover now, the "pinning" effect is rendundant.

All that said, it would probably be easier to leave the "pinning" effect on weapons and just change what that effect is, and use a new term as you suggest (such as "suppressed") for units pinned in cover.

I would remove this clause for simplicity's sake. Imagine a half-strength unit of 4 Khorne berzerkers. One dies to a sniper rifle hit; meaning that two morale checks are made (one for a 'fearsome' weapon, one for the casualty). If this result in one more dying, then the remaining two in the unit take a further unsaveable casualty... quite a complicated system!

I don't think you quite understand. If a unit of 4 Khorne Bezerkers were shot at by more than 4 sniper rifle shots, and suffered a casualty from them (a fearsome weapon), they would indeed take two morale checks after the casualty was removed. If either of these morale checks are failed the unit would suffer a casulaty (or two if both are failed).

Now, at the *end* of the shooting phase if the unit has suffered 25% casualties, it would take another morale check. If that was also failed, the unit would indeed lose another casualty. But that would be it. . .all morale checks for the phase would be completed.

I can understand if you think this is too complicated for your tastes. . .but this is labeled "advanced" morale rules and is intended for those players already very familiar with the game who don't mind adding some complexity. If I were trying to just "fix" the current morale rules without adding complexity, I would honestly go a completely different route.


You seem to generally not 'get' the additional casualty rules. They quite simply represent the fact that a unit will take more casualties from shooting if it stands around when it should be running away or getting it's head down.

Essentially, it is a balancing concept for all the armies in the game that either ignore morale checks (Fearless, Synapse) get to re-roll their checks, or have some other special rule that stop them from falling back. If the unit ignores morale one way or another it is going to pay for it in casualties.


Thanks for all your feedback!

Does the TAU portion need to be redone now that Inspiring Presence is determined by "Night Fight" rules?

Yeah, that was the old rules. I do need to go back and change it for the new codex.

Thanks for the reminder, I've been meaning to go back and edit this a bit (incorporating some of Cpl_Saint's feedback too).

My local group was looking to add "real" morale to our 40K games. This gives us a head start to try some games with. I'll post some results when we get some games in.