God of War special rule

[Grey Mage]

With GoW you have three choices; roll the Ld test normally (chance of pass or fail) , Automatic failure or automatic success.

The choice is made before the test.

After the test you determine if the test meets the rules for No Retreat.

If you picked the auto -pass you are subject to no retreat.

This is my interpretation of the rules. If you roll and pass, well your good- you took the chance and got the reward. If you fail, then again... you took the chance and lost. If you choose to run, well then your gambling on if they catch you or not... if they do you take no retreat wounds anyways, if they dont then your fine. If you choose to stay, you pay the price- no retreat wounds.

 

Akaiyou- Fluff is fun and good... and I can see where your going with this. However, they do have an option that makes them not suffer from no retreat wounds. The idea that because Ultras think tactically that they could never, ever, be overwhelmed by a ferocious attack is ludicrous. Is that to say that because my army includes pedro that I should never ever run from anything? No. I get stubborn.

 

And for those who say "shall never fall back" refers to all the time every time... well I can only disagree and say that when you choose to pass the test automatically you can never fall back- as long as that is the choice you make you will always get that benefit. As opposed to a LD roll, where you make the choice, but may or may not get the benefit.

[simberti]

ok so lets say i decide to take the i will roll the dice but guess what i'll pass the test anyway option, i'm not losing any men. i dont think ive read anywhere in calgars entry for gow rule that your unit is getting the fearless trait? unless im wrong.. the word automatically is never used in calgars entry as it is in the fearless rule:

 

calgar: ... can chose to pass or fail any morale check they are called upon to take

fearless: fearless troops automatically pass all morale test and pinning test they are required to take, and will never fall back

i personaly think there is a big gap in the meaning of the words chose and automatically.....

option one: roll the Ld test normally = i will chose to pass

as to quote greyknight:So you feel that you should get all the benefits of fearless but none of the drawbacks because you have a version of fearless- autopassing morale checks that has an additional rule; you can automatically fail morale checks- that makes it better.

 

it never states anywhere that we are fearless!!!!!!! unless i cant read... that word is never even mentioned in the GOW rule! we just chose to pass the test...

(You automatically pass it with god of war- you suffer from no retreat.) once again, you pass it..... not AUTOMATICALLY so if it dosent mention automatically in the rule entry i dont think you suffer the no retreat penalty, cause you are not. we cant add words to a rule. plus the codex has been writen after the rulebook so.....

 

dunno if it makes any sense... but i dont think you lose men..

 

simon

[Akaiyou]

Ok this is what should happen next time you have a game and someone tries to tell you that Calgar automatically passes his test when using God of War.

 

Lose combat by however many and then do NOTHING. You decide the outcome ONLY at the time you are called upon to take a test. So the answer is simple DO NOT DECIDE sit there and stare at your opponent

 

And we will see exactly what part of this process is 'automatic' like it is for units that 'are' infact subject to no retreat.

 

For those arguing in favor of it being automatic. Please tell me what would you do if you have an opponent playing calgar sit there and comtemplate for hours, hell days and maybe even weeks about which outcome he wants to choose.

 

Are you going to argue that it is automatic and he can't think about it? That he has NO options? Or will you stand there and wait?

 

This is very similar to going from movementh phase, to shooting phase and then just standing there thinking about what you will shoot for the next 5 hours. As long as you have CHOICES nothing is automatic. Just because no dice are rolled does not make it auto-pass/fail there is nothing in the book that says such.

[Grey Mage]

Id wait until our time was up, then inform him he wasn an idiot... and go on with the rest of my games.

 

And yes... its still automatic. Because one you make the choice the result is automatic as opposed to almost anything else in the game.

 

Want to shoot at an enemy unit? Fine, make sure your in range, roll to hit, roll to wound, your opponent makes saves... none of that is automatic because it has a chance of failing.

 

Want to stay when youve been beaten in combat? Fine roll a leadership test and see if you can- not automatic, as theres a chance it wont go the way you want it to.

Want to stay in combat and have Marneus Calgar on the table? Fine, make a decision. Cool... it now automatically goes the way you chose, no chance of deviation of dissapointment. You say they stay... and so they do, automatically.

[VariableBob]

Id wait until our time was up, then inform him he wasn an idiot... and go on with the rest of my games.

 

And yes... its still automatic. Because one you make the choice the result is automatic as opposed to almost anything else in the game.

 

Want to shoot at an enemy unit? Fine, make sure your in range, roll to hit, roll to wound, your opponent makes saves... none of that is automatic because it has a chance of failing.

 

Want to stay when youve been beaten in combat? Fine roll a leadership test and see if you can- not automatic, as theres a chance it wont go the way you want it to.

Want to stay in combat and have Marneus Calgar on the table? Fine, make a decision. Cool... it now automatically goes the way you chose, no chance of deviation of dissapointment. You say they stay... and so they do, automatically.

If I choose to assault, have I assaulted automatically? If I choose to fire, have I fired automatically? If I choose to move, have I moved automatically?

The outcome is indeterminate until such time as you make the decision, just as the outcome is indeterminate until such time as the dice have been rolled.

By your argument once the dice are rolled the result is automatic.

 

It does not say "automatically pass or fail". It does not say "automatically obtain a result". The wording is clear, "automatically pass". Only should a pass result without the possibility of any other result (as in, automatically), is this requirement met.

[Legatus]

I have maintained in the original thread that a resoning such as

 

A Morale Test is required -> The option is to Fail or Pass, and it is decided to Pass -> Therefor, the Test can never be failed

 

is nonsensical. But it did not lead anywhere then, and it will probably not do so now, so let me refer you to the Grey Area Rules Thread. I doubt that this thread here will reach any other consensus.

[DevianID]

resoning such as

A Morale Test is required -> The option is to Fail or Pass, and it is decided to Pass -> Therefor, the Test can never be failed

is nonsensical

 

I believe perhaps the logic flow above here is off, which could be a reason why you are having issues

 

A morale test is required -> A morale test is performed by rolling 2d6 and comparing it to your [modified] leadership -> GoW is an optional rule that lets you pass a morale test without taking a morale test -> a test that is passed with roll has no chance of failure and can never be failed -> a unit taking a morale test that can never be failed will never fall back -> a unit that passes a morale check with no roll and will never fall back suffers wounds per 'no retreat'

 

So basicly, once you decide to use your special rule, you no longer are capable of falling back. The idea that yes, before you decided to do something, you could have fallen back, doesnt change the outcome. Logically, it has the same merit as saying an assault marine squad with attached chaplain does not have to take 'no retreat' wounds, because you could have decided not to attach the chaplain in the first place.

 

Basicly, my position feels the following is false: "Instead of passing with no roll and not falling back, I could have decided not to (attach this chaplain/use GoW) for this squad, and if I had decided that, then I would be able to fall back--thus I do not meet the condition that I will never ever fall back, even though I am not falling back now."

[GTang]

Unlike in Fantasy, a morale test is not firmly defined as a die roll. It's called the most common method, but is not necessarily the only one. So calling GoW as something that avoids a morale test is possible, but not necessary - it could as easily be called the morale test.

 

The results are certainly the same as if a die roll were used.

 

If a regular morale test doesn't trigger No Retreat!, a God of War morale check shouldn't either. Fearless, and other special rules, generally say automatically, no retreat! applies, or there is no morale test (or morale check) for losing close combat.

[Legatus]

I believe perhaps the logic flow above here is off, which could be a reason why you are having issues

I am having issues because with GoW there is at one point a decision whether the unit will fail the test (and then fall back) or whether the unit will pass the test, and you are then looking at the point after that decision has been made, and if the decision was to pass the test that therefor the test can never fail.

 

If the test has been passed, it will then never fail.

 

Like, the model will never miss with his attacks that have successfully hit.

[SeattleDV8]

It's not that the test had been passed it is how the test was passed.

If you rolled normally there was a chance of failure, so the No Retreat criteria are not met.

If you choose to auto-pass there was no chance of failure (you would never fall back) and you then meet the criteria for No Retreat.

 

The term automatic as used by GW refers to a game mechanic, passing (or failing) a test, hitting or wounding , etc without a dice roll.

[DevianID]

If the test has been passed, it will then never fail.

Like, the model will never miss with his attacks that have successfully hit

I will agree with your assessment... But I also place greater emphasis in GoW passing the check with no roll. What constitutes 'taking a morale check' is pretty clearly defined as rolling 2d6, and thus when using GoI to pass with no roll, you are modifing the 'take a morale check' system.

 

In your quoted example, while technically it is true that 'you will never miss with an attack that has successfully hit,' the GoW example is more akin to saying 'you will never miss an attack that hits with no roll' just like 'you will never fail a morale check you pass with no roll.'

 

Plus, the fact there is no roll, no actual morale check, makes the condition in the rules 'These units will not take morale checks and will never fall back' apply to GoW units that choose to pass with no morale check. This is different for units that roll a morale check and pass it, because while you can truthfully say 'A unit that passes it's morale roll on 2d6 will never fall back,' these units do not hit the condition required for 'no retreat,' due to the all important morale 2d6 die roll that clearly seperates GoW from a regular morale test.

[Telveryon]

""No retreat" only applies to units which are immune to Morale Checks or automatically pass morale checks. The "God of War" uses the word "can", there is no obligation inherited in the rule (as is the case with "Fearless") if you really want you can choose to roll for it if you really want, what the rule does is allow you to choose how much you roll. If the "God of War" rule read something along the lines off "can automatically pass or automatically fail any Morale checks" then I'd agree that it would be subject to "No Retreat", but as it stands, it does not since there is nothing automatic about it since the possibility of failure is always there. If a unit benefiting from "God of War" is subject to "No retreat" then so should any model that passes a Morale check in melee.

[Legatus]

It's not that the test had been passed it is how the test was passed.

If you rolled normally there was a chance of failure, so the No Retreat criteria are not met.

If you choose to auto-pass there was no chance of failure (you would never fall back) and you then meet the criteria for No Retreat.

For you it is the lack of the "chance" to fall back, but there is the "possibility" to fall back. The means by which it is decided are different (choice instead of die roll), but there may well be some situations where a unit might try to fall back instead and then will indeed do so. A bolter squad fighting against a dreadnought, for example. How often will the unit decide to fall back from combat? Not that often. Do you know how often a unit led by Lysander or Kantor that happens to be within range of their standard will fail a test? Statistically 1 in 144 times. With them it is "chance", because you roll, but will they statictically fall back more often than a unit led by Calgar?

 

Both units will fall back very rarely, but both can do so. With one of the units it is up to "chance", while with the other it is up to "choice". You say that "chance" is what matters for the "No Retreat" roll, but I say it is the mere possibility to fall back at all, and the game mechanic by which it is decided is not described by the rule.

[Race Bannon]

Uh oh, Legatus vs. DevianID.

 

Again.

 

This topic was exhausted before, right?

 

I think the rule stands alone: you choose to pass or fail. Choice made, deal done. There is nothing more after that. That's the power of GoW. I know , I know, I'm not playing 40K by the rules, but what works for me and my LGS is what happens above. I choose -> fail -> unit runs OR I choose -> pass -> unit stands ground. Neither uses No Retreat. Neither do we use lengthly "what if" discussions. The rule is used as written, simply enough.

 

Alright, tear that apart and tell me I'm wrong, it's ok. At least I got to type something in this thread. :lol:

[SeattleDV8]

The choice in no way stops you from automatically passing a Ld test.

For example Combat Tactics, SM:Codex

"A Non-Fearless Space Marine unit with this special rule can choose to automatically fail any Morale Check it is called upon to take."

Gow allows you a choice also but if that choice is to pass the test without rolling dice you have 'automatically' passed and are subject to No Retreat.

[Legatus]

Whether "automatic" means the outcome can not be influenced in any way or whether it only means that it is not up to chance is one side of the debate. (Technically the term can be used for both instances.) I am still more interrested in the "and never fall back" part, which I maintain is not something that can logically be assessed at the point after it has been decided that the test is passed instead of failed, and that the mere possibility that the test is failed at the point the test is forced means there is no extra "No Retreat" damage.

[Grey Mage]

Id wait until our time was up, then inform him he wasn an idiot... and go on with the rest of my games.

 

And yes... its still automatic. Because one you make the choice the result is automatic as opposed to almost anything else in the game.

 

Want to shoot at an enemy unit? Fine, make sure your in range, roll to hit, roll to wound, your opponent makes saves... none of that is automatic because it has a chance of failing.

 

Want to stay when youve been beaten in combat? Fine roll a leadership test and see if you can- not automatic, as theres a chance it wont go the way you want it to.

Want to stay in combat and have Marneus Calgar on the table? Fine, make a decision. Cool... it now automatically goes the way you chose, no chance of deviation of dissapointment. You say they stay... and so they do, automatically.

If I choose to assault, have I assaulted automatically? If I choose to fire, have I fired automatically? If I choose to move, have I moved automatically?

The outcome is indeterminate until such time as you make the decision, just as the outcome is indeterminate until such time as the dice have been rolled.

By your argument once the dice are rolled the result is automatic.

 

It does not say "automatically pass or fail". It does not say "automatically obtain a result". The wording is clear, "automatically pass". Only should a pass result without the possibility of any other result (as in, automatically), is this requirement met.

 

If you choose to assault, and are out of range... you do not assault. If you choose to fire you may also be out of range, or LOS... there are conditions to be met- a decission doesnt mean automatic results in most cases. If you choose to move, then you must look and check for difficult terrain, wich would require a test, if there isnt such... then you move normally... and yes quite automatically- your troops will go wherever you place them.

 

I dont see where the chance of automatic failure would ever come into the rule description.... as you dont take no retreat wounds if you choose to fail the test... unless your caught AND have ATSKNF- wich tells us you take them under those circumstances.

 

If the test has been passed, it will then never fail.

Like, the model will never miss with his attacks that have successfully hit

So your saying that if I have a wolf gaurd with mark of the wulfen I dont take no retreat wounds because at one point I had the option of Not giving him the upgrade? Your better than that argument Legatus.

[Legatus]

So your saying that if I have a wolf gaurd with mark of the wulfen I dont take no retreat wounds because at one point I had the option of Not giving him the upgrade? Your better than that argument Legatus.

Well, if that Wolf Guard is forced to take a morale test, is it possible for him to fail that test and fall back?

[angry man]

ive been looking at this thread and it looks like people are far too interested in twisting the rules and altering the meaning of words within the rules to make up their arguements.

 

i fail to understand why people are arguing the relevance of automatically pass in the No Retreat rules.

 

Surely this rule affects only units that, at the time of requiring a morale check (due to losing a combat), can NEVER, NEVER, NEVER EVER fail -- units that are fearless, nids within range of a synapse, units of orks over 12men strong etc... are catagorically UNABLE to fail one, regardless of whether they wish to or not. the rules wont let them -- GoW special rule allows the ability to fail, just because the player chooses not to does not mean that they couldnt have; meaning that they dont, never fail. meaning that the unit isnt subject to the No Retreat rule.

 

or am i being naive and people dont think its that simple - id be interested to hear if anybody can find another unit in the game that has the ability to both pass and fail (by any means, 'automatic' (whatever) or otherwise) a morale check in any one given situation (marines dont count as that is a detailed and perfectly clear and understood part of their ATSKNF special rule as per C:SM). Good Sirs; i challenge you

 

AM

[Lord Humongous]

Have you read up on Ultramarines and are you aware of what their fighting style is like? Read the Combat Tactics entry it tells you right there. And after reading that there's no way you can tell me that, it sounds to you like the type of army that would find itself subject to No Retreat (that's assuming that you read the ENTIRE No Retreat entry as well).

 

Having read their codex, that's EXACTLY they type of army the seem to be. They know when being stalwart and making sacrifices is (and isn't) worthwhile, and are not afraid to face those sacrifices when needed. Having the option to automatically pass morale rolls (facing the smaller risk of "No Retreat" for the benefit of a larger tactical purpose) fits them perfectly.

[Legatus]

And the Imperial Fists, who are supposed to the ones who sometimes not know when it would be better to fall back, they get stubborn instead, which will reduce the chances of suffering "No Retreat" due to failed morale tests. But it is the Ultramarines under Calgar who will take the "No Retreat" hits all the time?

[Chengar Qordath]

id be interested to hear if anybody can find another unit in the game that has the ability to both pass and fail (by any means, 'automatic' (whatever) or otherwise) a morale check in any one given situation (marines dont count as that is a detailed and perfectly clear and understood part of their ATSKNF special rule as per C:SM). Good Sirs; i challenge you

I'm pretty sure someone mentioned earlier that an Inquisitor Lord's Iron Will ability (which lets the Lord auto-pass or auto-fail any morale check for him and his unit) does incur the No Retreat penalty.

[SeattleDV8]

Indeed it does ( or did via a 4th ed. FAQ) the Inquisitor Lord using Iron Will to pass a Ld test triggered No Retreat.

That said we do not have a current FAQ to cover this.

[GTang]

The 4th Edition WH FAQ doesn't mention No Retreat! being triggered. I'd played that it didn't with the same rationale as now.

 

You can verify that this is so through the miracle of the internet wayback machine. Here was their FAQ list back then, and a link to their last official Witch Hunters FAQ. (Remember when the window would resize when it was clicked?) It's likely that an unofficial FAQ is misremembered as an official one. The Adepticon FAQ today, for example, rules that God of War does trigger No Retreat!. As far as I can recall, despite having had the opportunity, GW never FAQed this position on Iron Will.

 

And as usual when this point comes up, notice that the Iron Will ability applies even when an automatic failure occurs. So, if choosing is an automatic failure, you would create a rule that applies to itself. Therefore, it must not be an automatic failure, implying that it's also not an automatic pass. Which, again, makes sense because it does not say automatic. Every other special rule which No Retreat! applies to does say automatic or mentions No Retreat!.

 

Strictly speaking, No Retreat! does not apply by RAW. It's a stretch of RAI to say it should when GW makes it clear (for GW) in all other cases.

[Legatus]

The V4.0 FaQs for Daemon Hunters and Witch Hunters were not structured as FaQs, but more as rule updates, and at least the ones I got do not adress 'Iron Will'. I may not have all the versions (only one of each).

 

I will say, though, that the 4th Edition 'No Retreat' rules did not specify that the units it affected "do not take morale checks and never fall back". That part was added in 5th Edition, so while it would still be interresting to see how GW ruled for Iron Will back then, it is questionable whether you can just apply it to the 5th Edition 'No Retreat' rule.