PDA

View Full Version : How fearless do we need?



xerxeshavelock
11-04-2011, 09:33
I was thinking about And they shall know no fear, and thinking it seems a little complicated. It does describe how the developers want Space Marines to behave, but why only them? If the basic rules don't cover what brave troops should do under fire would it not be better to change them rather than introduce a special rule. Currently the catalogue of bravery stands at:

Ld7 - not that brave
Ld8 - quite brave
Ld9 - pretty darn brave really
Ld10 - extremely brave
Stubborn - really not going anywhere
Fearless - Absolutely not going anywhere
And They Shall Know No Fear - if we do go anywhere we're coming back. And not counting as moving. Unless enemy is within 6"

Just seems a little needlessly complicated to me. My preferred solution would be to have the rules for how troops act based more on the ATSKNF rules, but for all troops, so the advantage Marines get is simply that they can rally below half strength. Then get rid of stubborn and the Fearless assault liability. That way if a troop is being brave (based on Ld) it will always act the same way, and if it fails it is penalised appropriately.

I do understand that Ld is used for other things and that a better solution for some people would be to have a separate stat, but practically I can't see that hapenning.

Any thoughts?

IAMNOTHERE
11-04-2011, 10:01
I think the whole of 40k morale/leadership section needs a rewrite - it's glossed over far too much right now.

Thanatos_elNyx
11-04-2011, 10:15
Not sure what exactly you are saying.

But to fix Fearless I would simply give them a Ld check.
If they fail the Ld check THEN they take the No Retreat! wounds.

Though I do agree that Ld is not the best stat for use with, say, Psychic tests.
But I doubt they would add a new stat just for these so Ld is the closest stat to use.

LonelyPath
11-04-2011, 13:45
With psychic tests I'd like to see the return of the Willpower statistic.

I would say Ld 7 is average though and not "not that brave".

Trasvi
11-04-2011, 15:07
I think way too many armies have ways around the normal leadership rules. In fact, the only army I can think of that doesn't have at least one OTT leadership rule is Tau, and thats only because Ethereals are pretty poor. There are far more exceptions to normal leadership than there are units which follow it.

I can see SOME units being fearless/stubborn, but the rule is given out far too much. Even most Necron units are justified as 'not feeling fear like normal mortals, but still believing in tactical retreat'

dancingcricket
11-04-2011, 17:35
I was thinking about And they shall know no fear, and thinking it seems a little complicated. It does describe how the developers want Space Marines to behave, but why only them? If the basic rules don't cover what brave troops should do under fire would it not be better to change them rather than introduce a special rule.

Considering the prevalence of Space Marines, at this point I wouldn't consider ATSKNF a special rule anymore. When better than half the armies out there have it, it's not really all that special. Just saying...

xerxeshavelock
11-04-2011, 19:28
Considering the prevalence of Space Marines, at this point I wouldn't consider ATSKNF a special rule anymore. When better than half the armies out there have it, it's not really all that special. Just saying...

Half the point. Having Fearless and And they Shall Know No Fear seems a little silly to me.

insectum7
11-04-2011, 22:07
Considering that models with "ATSKNF" can still fail a break test and fall back off the board... I wouldn't call them better than fearless.

They're just quick to rejoin the fight AFTER falling back, and will keep fighting in CC even if caught in a bad situation. It's really that they don't give up in situations when most other troops do.

Stealin' Genes
11-04-2011, 23:25
The rule is better than fearless primarily in close combat, which is where most failed leadership tests happen. When administered a brutal pounding in assault, marines can try to escape without risking being wiped out wholesale (yeah, yeah, NR wounds, I'd still rather roll those than just get swept), rather than truly fearless troops, who stand their ground and take extra losses, or everyone else, who turn tail and take their chances.

The fact that ATSKNF troops will sometimes fall back off the board or be pinned is a good point, though.

RobPro
11-04-2011, 23:32
Oddly, Necrons follow normal morale rules. Ld10 is not what it used to be.

Bunnahabhain
11-04-2011, 23:36
Oddly, Necrons follow normal morale rules. Ld10 is not what it used to be.

Ld 10 is fine. So long as it come with stubborn, and a bolt pistol powered re-roll.... I'll live with that 1 in 144 chance of failing...

But seriously, the whole 40k Ld system wants shaking up. It is both needlessly complex, and unbalanced.

Korraz
12-04-2011, 00:12
Leadership is nonexistant in 40k anyway.

And the whole system needs shaking and rewriting.

Aluinn
12-04-2011, 01:15
I think both Fearless and ATSKNF should be redefined as identical to Stubborn, but that everyone (even without any of those rules) should also be able to regroup by passing a Ld test if they flee at below half of starting unit strength. Casualties from shooting should cause the unit to be pinned if they fail the Ld test, rather than cause them to run--call it suppression. Weapons with Pinning should inflict a -2 Ld modifier for the test.

This would allow Space Marines to retain most of their current benefits--i.e. the auto-regroup without counting as moving will be less important, since a unit that is shot at won't actually have to move any longer if they should fail the morale test. It would be more intuitive, as "going to ground" is the more natural response to being shot at than running by far; running will usually just allow one to be shot at more easily. Finally, non-SM units who flee at below half strength now, for almost all purposes, might as well count as destroyed, but stay on the table and cause us to make more dice rolls anyway, and the above would fix that.

Of course, this wouldn't appease those who think that Ld should play a much greater role in the game, but it would be, IMO, a decent way to tweak the current system and resolve the issue of Stubborn/ATSKNF being better than Fearless, which sometimes makes sense but often doesn't.

RobPro
13-04-2011, 03:07
I think being automatically pinned if you fail and LD test would be awful, way worse than failing morale and running (unless that run would put you off the table).

RandomThoughts
13-04-2011, 12:15
1. I agree that we don't need x different special rules for something that could be achieved by a single stat instead. Same thing for movement, by the way, except that they got rid of the M stat and replaced it with more than half a dozen special rules instead (Slow and Purposeful, Cavalry, Fleet, various forms of running, bike movement including turbo boost (which is essentially nothing more than the x2 speed run move from 2nd edition) and so on).

2. I agree that Leadership is so much of a non-issue right now that they could just as well remove it from the game altogether - except then they'd have to admit that sniper rifles are pointless under the current ruleset. (remember when you could pick off a squad leader? You know, the way Sniper rifles are actually used in real life...)

3. I fully agree that all units should be able to regroup below 50% unit strength.

4. I think the problem with running / pinning is that the sensible reaction would have to be based on what broke the unit. If you're taking casualties from fire, you don't run away, you go deeper into cover. If you're getting massacred in close combat however, you don't crawl deeper into the ground, you try to run away.

5. For comparison, in Warmachine fleeing units can do nothing but run away from enemy units in their next turn (moving only the distance they want, so they could stay in cover or run behind the next piece of cover or just run away from all the scary melee units), after that they can always try to rally.

Tastyfish
13-04-2011, 13:09
I think I'd be fairly happy to ditch the whole LD values as being the limit of when things run away and switch to something closer to Epics suppression (which is a brilliant system) - and use Ld more to remove suppression or perform special actions, where the universally high values have less of an effect because you want the units to pass most of the time in order to keep the game flowing i.e if a unit passes a Ld test at beginning of it's turn it can remove D6 markers (all if they have ATSKNF) or go to ground and lose them all.

Not sure how broken would work, perhaps something akin to the no retreat rules fearless units get.