40K BREAKING: Morale In 8th

Have you been wondering how Morale is going to the battlefield in 8th? Take a look at what Games Workshop has to say about it!

If there was one thing that most folks could pretty much ignore in 7th, Leadership and Morale were it. Just about every single army had a way to bypass it’s effects and it just wasn’t used. Inversely, if you had one of those rare units that actually did suffer from it’s effects, you could really bog the game down with repeated tests! It did not impact every army equally and it just wasn’t fun.

Games Workshop has taken that feedback to heart and this new Morale system is a lot simpler, way more streamlined, and should impact all armies in some way.

via Warhammer Community

“The new Morale phase is simple, and only happens once per player turn, at the end of all your other phases. It will apply to almost every unit, and represents warriors fleeing the battlefield, dying from the psychic feedback shockwaves of their allies, or retreating with injured or fallen brethren. There will be very few units indeed that will not feel its effects.

The mechanics are simple – any units that suffered casualties in a turn must take a Morale test at the end of it. You just roll a dice, add the number of models from the unit that have been slain, and if the number is bigger than the unit’s Leadership, the unit loses the difference in additional models.

That’s it! No units falling back, no regroup tests – all that is gone.”

Read the full article HERE

Key Changes:

  • Morale phase happens once per player turn
  • Any unit that suffered casualties must make a morale test
  • Roll a die, add the number of lost models, compare vs your leadership value – that’s it!

I’m digging these changes! This system is already used in AoS and it works pretty well. Bringing the core of it over to 8th is a good call – but don’t worry, they’ve also mentioned that there are units that can modify the dice roll. Dark Apostles were one example they mentioned – nearby units from the same legion can use his leadership to roll instead of their own.

Enemy units can also negatively impact your morale tests as well. The example for that was the Hemlock Fighter’s ability to lower enemy units leadership by 1, which works out to 1 additional lost model on every failed test within range!

I do want to stress one important distinction: This test is for lost MODELS not lost WOUNDS. For some units, those are the same thing. For multi-wound models however, that can be different…Just something to keep in mind when you’re testing.

What do you think of these changes to Morale? Let us know in the comments below!

  • Dan Osmond

    It’s going to help necrons who are usually prone to wipe out by sweeping advances.

    • Djbz

      I hope they tone down the Necron Ld and/or durability a tad
      (They should be hard to kill/make flee not virtually impossible)

      • Dan Osmond

        Fingers crossed otherwise they’re going nowhere.

        • Fergie0044

          Probably. Haven’t we already seen SM losing 1 point of leadership in their new profiles?

          • Dan Osmond

            That’s right, down to 7

          • Haighus

            That makes me worried for what Guardsmen will have :/

            I guess it makes sense now they have removed the two-dice-for-Ld-tests thing though.

          • I doubt it will be much less than 5. My guess is Ld of most units will be 5, 6 or 7.

          • Haighus

            Yeah, I thought 6, which seemed low. But then I realised there is just one die rolled now.

          • AircoolUK

            Looking at Stormcasts (they’re called Sigmarines for a reason), they have a Bravery of 6, with 9 for Hero’s. Going from 2D6 to 1D6 and the results of what happens when you fail a Morale Test means it’s difficult to judge what the mode Leadership will be for 40K.

          • Matt Halkos

            Yes but I imagine that atsknf will add 1 or 2 to the result.

          • What’s the purpose of that? Why not just giving Marines +1 Ld instead directly in the profile? 8th is meant to simplify things, not to bloat it yet again with loads of special rules.

          • Haighus

            Well, I’m guessing the reason is that Ld as a stat could be used for other things than Morale. Otherwise it may as well be called the morale or bravery stat.

            I think that ATSKNF is likely to make Marines braver, but not tactically better, if it is included. Which is reasonable.

            For example, we don’t know how command points are going to work- they may interact with Ld.

          • AircoolUK

            Yeah, if ATSKNF was a simple +1 Ld, I’d imagine it would already be in the profile.

          • Jared van Kell

            It is probably going to be ignoring certain negative leadership modifiers.

          • Fergie0044

            Then why not just keep it what it was? I suspect ATSKNF will do something else, like a re-roll. Or, in the grand space marine tradition, taking causalities will actually make them stronger! Can’t have SM actually losing any games, can we? :p

          • Silverbeast

            ATSKNF just give you immune against fear and terror.

          • BurpinforDayz

            It could just give a re roll.

          • GreekSauce

            It’s gone as well as fearless

          • Jared van Kell

            Fearless has not gone, it has changed so that fearless units do not lose any additional models if the number of models lost + D6 is greater than their leadership.

      • rtheom

        Necrons will probably be treated like undead with universal Leadership of 10 still. Which is good, but not impossible to overcome.

        • Djbz

          The difference there is I don’t believe that undead in AOS are anywhere near as durable as necrons in 40k

          • rtheom

            True, but hopefully the Necrons will cost a lot more points for being more durable as well. Undead have 10 Leadership so don’t need to worry about that roll as much as other armies, but most are still very squishy and very cheap as a result. But really, that’s the main question at the core of all of this: can they balance the points properly? In theory, if you do that, then any combination of ability and durability is fair.

          • AircoolUK

            Hopefully they’ll come out of the trap balanced, but of course, at least now things can be corrected quickly. Having digital versions is going to have the advantage of not having to constantly check for errata etc…

  • Stealthbadger

    Ahahahhahahaha welcome to mob rule imperium scum!

    • And we’re sure it will return?

      • Stealthbadger

        I was making the point that now others will know what it’s like to have to remove your own models as a ‘benefit’.

        Overall i like the new rule.

        • Ah. I see. Yea, I personally prefer losing some models instead of the entire unit running away.

    • Tiernoc

      Except when your blob squad of Termigaunts or Boyz get 10 out of a 20 or 30 man squad shredded by heavy bolters, then you are guaranteed an extra 1-6 wounds at the end of the turn.

      Not losing the entire unit is great, but this is definitely going to have a price attached to it, and one that the Imperium armies are unused to paying.

      • orionburn

        But now that some weapons like bolters won’t have a save modifier that means a lot of Nids & Orks that never got an armor save before now will. Somebody asked about synapse on the FB page but of course they just played coy. Will be interesting to see how this all comes together.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          I hope Synapse is turned into a Bubble of Benefits rather than a Bubble of Necessary.

          • orionburn

            Agreed. Synapse should have an upside to it as much as it does the downside. Their really should be some sort of bonus that it gives, whether that’s an increase in leadership, attacks…whatever. I’m sure it will get an overhaul as well. I know it’s not cool to be optimistic on anything GW does, but if they’ve been listening to the masses then I don’t doubt they’ve tried to balance things out and make horde armies like the Orks & Nids viable once again. When I first got into 40k Orks were as much of a poster boy for the game as Marines were. For me to not see them played often is sad.

          • rtheom

            I’d be willing to bet most ‘nids have a Leadership of 5 and it goes up to 10 when in Synapse. Unlikely it will do much else since they’re trying to minimize rules.

      • Matt Halkos

        plus mob rule now already causes 1 to 6 wounds usually, in addition to rolling mob rule every phase they suffer major casualties. Now at least they never run

    • ZeeLobby

      LoL. Sweet Justice!

  • Fergie0044

    so long sweeping advance, I will not miss you

    • Djbz

      I won’t.
      Losing entire squads from one bad morale check when fighting something that the unit wouldn’t really be afraid of sucks

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        Lol!

    • Farseerer

      Arguably the biggest (possibly best?) change so far. Hopefully there wont be an equivalent to army wide ATSKNF.

  • Edit: Mis-read the article.

    • Dan Osmond

      You only roll one dice.

      • Oh. OK, so… morale will only do anything if you’re able to kill a lot of models. Hmm.

        • Dan Osmond

          Focussing firepower will be more important, not just stopping once you’ve killed 25%. Might be a bit of a nerf for shooty armies.

        • EnTyme

          One thing that wasn’t mentioned in the article but exists in AoS is that a unit gets +1 to Bravery in the Battleshock (Aos Morale) phase for every 10 models, so a 50-man guard blob is effectively +5 Leadership for this purpose assuming that rule also carries over.

          • Dan Osmond

            Hopefully they bring that in as well. Blob army’s are very squishy so they would need something to help mitigate this.

          • Haighus

            They have also mentioned that stats can now go greater than 10 too, which would support this as a thing.

          • Marines have Ld7, so you need at least 40 Marines in a unit to gain Ld11 that way 😛

          • AircoolUK

            …and that’s on top of any extra bonuses the unit gets for having a certain amount of models.

            Strength in numbers…

          • Haighus

            Is this before or after casualties taken that turn- a 50 man Guard blob isn’t taking a test because it has no casualties yet.

          • EnTyme

            It’s the number present in the phase. Considering most weapons don’t have a rend value, Guardsmen will still get their 5+ save, so I would expect a unit starting at 50 to still have at least 40 models after being shot at by a squad of marines. That extra +4 leadership would help mitigate that loss.

          • Haighus

            Fair. Yeah, I think that will have to be a thing or nobody will be running large units.

      • Nyyppä

        Still. MSU > MLU.

        • EnTyme

          Unless large units get bonuses like they do in AoS.

          • Nyyppä

            Those do not change this unless they are way better than in AoS.

          • EnTyme

            Indeed. Bonuses like +1 to hit for having 20 models, +2 for 30 definitely wouldn’t help a unit. What am I thinking?

          • Nyyppä

            Now you are assuming that all of those models get to attack and have gotten in to combat without casualties.

            Besides as long as marines are 5-10 they will not give anything worthwhile to other factions either.

          • EnTyme

            I fail to see how the number of models able to attack has any bearing on the number required to gain a to-hit bonus. And what makes you think you can’t make it into combat with at least 20 models? Are you planning to footslog that unit across the battlefield in open terrain?

          • Well, I don’t know a non-SH transport that can carry 20 models.

          • Haighus

            Spartan, that Space Wolf flyer?, Battle wagons I think, Storm Eagles? and the Kharybdis. There are not many, and they are mostly FW.

          • Walter Vining

            space wolf flyer can only hold 16

          • Haighus

            Ok, I was right to add the ? 😀 I wasn’t sure about most of them.

          • davepak

            My tyranid warriors would love to have a transport….

          • Ghaniman

            Ork Battlewagon

          • Nyyppä

            You fail to see how more models doing the thing they get bonuses for is better than if fewer of those models get to do that? Well, you are right, that is a failure.

            It does not matter if one of the 20 reaches combat. You need to have enough volume for them to matter. 1 grot against a squad of SM is pretty weak. 20, charging and gettin a bonus to hit might make an actual dent.

            What makes you think they are always behind los block safe from everything or always in cover? What makes think the opponent has no means to kill them regardless?

  • Flan man

    This is just a blatant copy from AoS. Come on GW stop xeroxing one game in place of another!

    • Gunther Clone C

      But now they’re cross compatible! Imagine Skaven fighting Necrons! How bonkers would that be?! 😛

      • Brian

        That Skaven don’t exist in 40k yet is a cryin’ shame. :/

        • davepak

          and usually ultramarines don’t fight untramarines – but it happens all the time in 40k.

          What part don’t you believe?

    • AircoolUK

      Too right, it’s not as is 40K was a blatant copy of WHFB was it?

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        It’s not like 7th’s Psychic Phase was not a blatant copy of WFB’s.

  • Nyyppä

    So, people who said “you don’t know if it’s AoS in space” even when everything points that way. Have you changed your mind?

    • Why would they? “We haven’t seen everything yet”, etc 😉

      • Walter Vining

        because not everyone knows the rules for both systems.

        • It’s not needed to know the rules of AoS. If someone tells them it all looks like being the same as in AoS, one can either accept that or not. The latter doesn’t make much sense though and still it happens.

      • Nyyppä

        😀

    • The14th

      Older 40k was WFB in space, so why care now?

      • Adam James Osborne

        Because some folks liked WFB and don’t like AoS

        • Matt Razincka

          And some folks don’t like 40K 7th. Its all a matter of perspective.

      • Nyyppä

        I don’t mind. I’m asking from the people who do.

      • ZeeLobby

        LoL. except that they were extremely different on the table. Now they’re not. Dunno why you’d play both to be honest.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          Ehhhh. The two games constantly stole ideas from one another. The biggest difference where movement trays.

          • ZeeLobby

            They definitely borrowed back and forth, but lets not pretend that the only difference was the trays you moved units on, lol. Touche on the attempted down play though.

        • The14th

          40k was developed out of the same stat system, with a focus on squad tactics instead of locked formations. Unsurprisingly they diverged after a while.

          • ZeeLobby

            oh, i get that. But to say the biggest difference was movement trays, or that they had nearly this close a parallel before is stretching it. I mean once ranked units were a thing in WHFB, they played very differently.

        • AircoolUK

          They were, but the core of the game was the same. You could use a unit from WHFB 3rd in Rogue Trader without a problem as they were totally interchangeable. Hell, back then, because RT had the same root as WHFB, you could then convert RT to Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and back again.

        • davepak

          Because you like some of the armies?

          I love tau, necrons and lizard men.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah… I guess… Should just join the two games though. Seems like a lot to get your group to buy into two systems with close to identical gameplay. I know I’d have trouble selling it to mine.

          • davepak

            That is a fair point. I think the settings and models are different enough that the system is not a big deal. Usually when someone in my group wants a different game – its not the rules exactly (7th vs. AOS) its more “board game vs. spaceship combat vs. miniature war game” type thing. Even with different rules, 40k and Fantasy are sort of the same thing to some folks – as far was what to play.

    • AircoolUK

      I was hoping for AoS in space, but they’ve kept the S v T to-wound and a few other things, so it appears to be better than AoS in space.

      • Well, they didn’t keep WS vs WS though.

      • Nyyppä

        If you are playing Tau, sure.

        • AircoolUK

          I also play Dark Eldar Wyches and I’ve yet to see anything that hasn’t brought a smile to my face.

          • Nyyppä

            You assault fire warriors, kill them or they flee and storm surges annihilate your army. Oh, so much fun!

    • piglette

      I thought AoSification of 40k protests were more about the fluff side of things – people being terrified they were going to blow up the setting and make a new one.

      Also, since the generals handbook, aren’t people much more amenable to AoS’ game design.

  • Goatsplitter

    Okay, I knew I wasn’t going to love everything about the 8th. Battleshock has never been something I was happy about in AoS, and I am probably not going to like it in 40k either. I guess they all can’t be winners.

    • AircoolUK

      It was one of those mechanics that was abstracted to simplify the whole morale process.

      Initially, in WHFB, a failed Morale Test would cause the unit to break and if the attacking unit followed up, they would cause high casualties as they were running away, effectively removing the routing unit off the table. Of course, this had the knock on effect of being able to rout the whole army, especially if they had poor leadership.

      Meanwhile, units in a ranged firefight in 40K would more likely to just withdraw if they were suffering casualties to shooting, so a whole unit running off the table for suffering 25% casualties to shooting was a bit strange at times.

      AoS sort of drew a line down the middle and said ‘for whatever reason, you have less troops fighting for you now’. They weren’t necessarily dead, perhaps they did run away, got their head down in cover or some other way of being alive but not being able to fight.

      The outcome is similar for both methods, but whilst AoS is quicker and easier, you have to sometimes come up with an imaginative reason why a Dragon Ogre has suddenly disappeared after his mate was killed, but he himself suffered no damage.

      • Goatsplitter

        Oh I get it, and I even concede morale/break/panic tests can get cumbersome, but I still don’t love the ‘battle shock’ solution. It won’t make me rage quit or anything, but in this case I preferred the old cumbersome way of doing things.

        • Koonitz

          Personally, while I am appreciative and enjoy how the game is being streamlined and moving towards a more AoS style of gameplay (I do enjoy AoS, yes), I have to agree that the battleshock method of morale testing is a little jarring for the narrative.

          While I always stand by the fact that there’s always a narrative way to explain anything, this one has proved to be a little… obtuse. Not terrible, but strange.

          The old way did, also, feel a little more cinematic. You had units actively fleeing the scene (at least, for the small number of armies that cared). Though more often it was either they would immediately regroup, or were so whittled down that they would never regroup. That got a little boring. If the effect was more wide-spread, and much harder to mitigate (ie: No army-wide ATSKNF), and was more balanced for regrouping, I think it would see a more dynamically flowing battlefield for a more cinematic experience.

          I will, as always, find a way, and as I’m used to it with AoS, it won’t be a tough transition.

          • davepak

            But now, you can cinematically retreat from CC, which you could not before.
            And then you get to heroically regroup!

  • Andrew

    Hmm… wondering how this will apply to Tyranids. Will they remain fearless when within range of synapse creatures? Or will the whole synapse mechanic be dropped? The article mentions morale representing pyschic feedback from dead allies which could include Nids. This new morale could be very punishing for low-Ld gaunts. However, not having to worry about Instinctive Behaviour rolls is also a plus; perhaps there will still be synapse creatures but now they just lend their Ld to nearby units.

    • Dan Osmond

      It will be like when a tervigon dies. I doubt they will completely get rid of instinctive behaviour though.

    • Haighus

      I wonder if synapse will be mitigation for this effect- a bonus to Ld for example. Gaunts could end up having a very high Ld when in synapse range, and take less casualites, but be Ld 4 or something when out of synapse.

      • Or the entire mechanic could be gone entirely. Gaunts will have a different Ld value in 8th anyway.

        • SprinkKnoT

          I don’t think they’d scrap Synpase. It’s a pretty significant aspect of the Tyranid playstyle. It also gives them the opportunity to keep a lot of Tyranid creatures weak to non-morale related leadership effects, while making sure they don’t flee.

    • generalchaos34

      im sure synapse will allow for rerolls or reduce the penalty, it wouldn’t make sense otherwise!

      • Andrew

        Maybe a ‘roll two D6 and pick the lowest’ sort of thing. I’m putting my money on something like ‘models in range of synapse have Ld10’ rule though.

        • My bet would be on: “use the synapse creature’s LD instead”

          • Andrew

            Which I think is always 10 atm as all synapse models are fearless.

    • Jabberwokk

      Does this mean for example in a squad of 30 gaunts if the squad suffers 20 causalities and rolls 10 on the morale roll that the rest of the squad dies?

      Well….not a fan. reminds me of no retreat rolls which wiped out swarm style for me. But then again it helps out my warriors/raveners or another low model count/high wound squads.

      • You can’t roll a 10 on a single D6. But yes, that’s what it means. With 20 casulties, you don’t even need to roll anymore, the unit will be wiped already.

        • Jabberwokk

          Oh so it’s caped to 6 max. that’s not so bad when I compare to no retreat wounds. I think I can live with that.

          • Well, the number of models you can lose is not capped. As I said, have a unit of 30 gaunts, lose 20 in a turn and the other 10 will get lost due to morale too.

        • Andrew

          The obvious way to mitigate this would be to keep gaunt units to 10 models (or whatever the minimum will be now), unless there is a limit on the number of Troop choices. Now that templates have been scrapped, 30-model gaunt units don’t make sense, unless units can now spread their shooting over multiple enemy units.

          • Dan Osmond

            Msu. It has a lot of benefits.

          • If anything, I’d say the removal of templates did encourge large units, because now you can cram them all together in small spots without getting hurt. But morale counters that, so back to 3 units of 10 models instead.

          • Dan Osmond

            3 units of 10 all bunched together I’d say.

          • Andrew

            ”If anything, I’d say the removal of templates did encourge large units”

            No no, think about it… templates affected spacing but not the number of models in a unit. If I have three 10-model gaunt squads close to each other then a large blast template had the potential to cover more than one (or parts of) unit and could potentially kill more than 10 gaunts. So it wouldn’t matter if the 30 gaunts were in one large unit or three smaller ones.

            Without templates, the same enemy unit can (presumably) only be fired at a single unit; and therefore can only kill a maximum of 10 models.

          • But it won’t cause 10 hits most likely anyway, but like… D6?

          • Andrew

            It’s not much help against a single, former template weapon, put will waste firepower from a unit/model that fires multiple weapons that used to be template.

          • Andrew

            Also, I’d say that smaller units in general are more viable now that the whole ‘take a Leadership test when you lose 25% of the unit’ rule is gone.

          • Koonitz

            Not necessarily. AoS has a bonus to battleshock for every 10 models in the unit. If a Gaunt squad uses synapse Ld of 10 (assumed), and have 20 models, that’s +2, so effectively Ld 12. If the 20 models is based on taking 10 casualties from 30, that means you’re 10+d6 against Ld 12. So d6-2 casualties for a possible max of 4.

            Sure, you could do more casualties to make more flee, but the amount of firepower, and target focus, necessary means there are a whole bunch of other Tyranid broods moving up unscathed so you can whittle a bunch of meat shields down.

            Otherwise, my actual hope for Synapse is that the models become immune to battleshock within synapse. It makes sense with how synapse is, and they deserve a bone. This way you have to either dismantle their synapse network (which is what GW wants for the Tyranids, but it’s just too easy right now), or you have to chew through every single gaunt.

    • AircoolUK

      I’m pretty sure the units will behave the way they’re supposed to behave with rules specifically written for them.

      If Tyranid units were fearless whilst within Synapse range, I’m pretty sure they’ll still act in a similar way.

  • Adam James Osborne

    Blegh. I’ve liked some of the changes, but not this one. Absolutely dumbing down the LD stat and effects, inherent.

    • Walter Vining

      the LD stat before was largely useless. There were so many things that had an above average LD stat or were simply immune to negative effects of it that it didn’t matter.

    • wibbling

      Good. it was unnecessary and under used. Reducing complexity is important.

  • Peter B

    So it’s Instability for everyone?

  • DC

    I wasn’t impressed with the idea of it in AOS, it destroys the immersion of the game in my opinion, so no units flee at all? Just disappear from the field entirely? Nobody rally’s and comes back into the fray to at a crucial moment to turn the tide of the game? This element of the game is not addressed at all. Do Space Marines run away now? (And they shall know some fear). I’m not saying the previous system was great, and so far I’ve loved everything teased about 8th, just not this. I shall wait and see.

    • Fergie0044

      As they say in the article it covers a number of occurrences – fleeing, being wounded beyond the ability to fight, rescuing wounded comrades, phy-shock from fallen allies etc

      We lose at bit of realism/immersion to streamline and quicken the game.

      • DDisforDangerous

        I think it’s more an abstraction than a break in realism.

        • AircoolUK

          This is my way of thinking. Whilst the one roll is now going to cover an awful lot of situations which were originally covered by one rule or another, the actual outcome; models being removed from the table due to some Ld check failure will still be the same.

      • I don’t think it actually is less real. Of a unit, not always all or nobody would flee in reality, but some will, some won’t. And if you don’t see them as ‘dead’, but instead as ‘they ran away’, I think the mechanic is actually pretty real.

    • davepak

      But models do fall back and regroup – you decide now.
      (you can run from combat, remember).

  • Mary Toleson

    Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope. Not even once. Print what you want gw no groups around here will be using that !

    • davepak

      please let us know what you will be selling your models for on ebay

    • Ogirdor

      Speak for yourself. I for one enjoy this change as I know an Ork player that would welcome it.

    • wibbling

      Bye bye then.

  • Pyrrhus of Epirus

    this is the end of MSU warhammer, not that its a bad thing. Just gonna be to easy to wipe a 5 man marine or 3 man scat bike squad out now thanks to morale. Not that it is a bad thing.

    • SYSTem050

      Havent worked out all the variable but first glance this looks to me to benifit msu. Less dudes to kill means less likley to fail test. Eg 20 man guard squad far more likley to loose further dudes than a three man scat bike squad.

      • Pyrrhus of Epirus

        a 3 man squad that loses one guy, would have a very tough time weathering a poor roll on his leadership, they would essentially be auto wiped out. Where as a 10 man squad, would simply absorb a couple casualties and move on.

        • Haighus

          Well, you only roll a single D6 for Morale. So a squad of Marines with Ld7 needs to suffer 2 or more casualties to be at risk of losing any more models, and that is on a roll of a 6 with two casualties. A 5 man squad therefore has to be down to half strength before it is worried.

        • Andrew

          So?

          As far as we know, all the models in a unit still have to shoot at the same enemy unit/vehicle/whatever. If you have 3 x 3-model unit then the max they can kill is three. If you had 1 x 9-model unit then the max that they could kill is 9.

          Even if all 3 of your 3-model units take a casualty and have to take a morale test, those tests will still be easier to pass than if the same number of casualties were all in one unit.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          If you have 3 guys and Ld. 7, you won’t lose to Morale. if you lose 1 guy, 1+1d6 = 7 at the most, so you do not lose any models.

          • Pyrrhus of Epirus

            seems idle speculation what the leadership will be, marines dropped from what 9 down to 6. Its reasonable than that the 8 leadership scatbikes would drop down 3 aswell, down to 5. But not quite as bad as i thought, my scat bikes were always on the board edge anyway it seems, and just fled off the table anyway when i failed.

          • Haighus

            Marines are 7 now, which has dropped from 8. This is a drop of 1.

          • Pyrrhus of Epirus

            thanks for the clarification

          • Haighus

            It is an easy mistake to make- Marines often were in effect Ld 9 due to attached Characters and Veteran Sergeants.

          • Andrew

            What?

            Standard Tac Marine Ld has gone from 8 to 7.

            Where are you getting 9 to 6 from?

          • Pyrrhus of Epirus

            apparently i made a mistake, im clearly the worst person alive.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            Tac Squads went down 1 Leadership point, from 8 to 7.

        • SYSTem050

          But a three man squad cant break if it loses one guy (assuming bikes remain ld 7) while a ten man tac can loose five and on a 3+ will loose more.

          Will neeed to ruminate but think this reinforces msu rather than reduces it

          • AircoolUK

            That depends an awful lot on any special rules which might benefit the unit from a larger squad.

            For example, Savage Orruk Arrowboys get to make one extra attack with their bows (normally 2 attacks per model) if the unit has 20 or more models.

            That’s going to encourage you to take a 30 (90 attacks) model unit rather than 3x 10 model units (60 attacks).

      • AircoolUK

        Likely that Guard squads will have a bonus to those tests the larger they are though, and no doubt a Commissar nearby will make them ignore Morale Tests full stop.

        • Haighus

          Commissar kills squad members to prevent the squad members from being killed 😀

          • They don’t get killed, they ‘run away’ – imagine it that way 😉 In game-mechanics, that means ‘remove x models’ though.

          • Haighus

            Eh, Guardsmen that run away are just dead later when the Commissariat catches up with them…

          • 😀 That way or another, they are gone from play.

      • AircoolUK

        All depends on the unit and any special rules…

    • AircoolUK

      Not really as you have to cause significant damage to those small squads unless they have poor Leadership.

      A Marine squad isn’t going to fail a Morale Test unless it takes at least two casualties, and even then, with two casualties it will only lose one model as opposed to legging it off the table.

  • AircoolUK

    So far, so Age of Sigmar. A simple system that works with many units having ways of manipulating the results and of course Hero’s who can often let units re-roll, use their Leadership or grant immunity to Morale tests. Not to mention abilities that will cause Morale tests to be taken out of sequence.

    Be interesting to see how ‘And They Shall Know No Fear’ translates…

    • I guess ATSKNF translates to nothing. If it would give +1 Ld, it could instead simply be added to the profile directly. If it gives a re-roll, that would be insanely strong. Of course ‘insanely strong’ wouldn’t stop GW of going that way.

      • AircoolUK

        I doubt it. AoS carried over a lot of rules for units from Warhammer, I doubt 40K 8th will be any different. Perhaps a re-roll or modifier? Maybe it doesn’t take Morale tests until it’s taken a certain number of casualties in a turn/at once.

        Maybe instead of losing further models, they just make a Fall Back move in the Morale Phase and therefore act normally on their next turn.

        • As I said… modifier could be added directly to the profile instead and re-roll would be insanely strong. Still possible of course, but especially modifier would be useless bloat.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          ATSKNF could be roll 2d6, take the lower number.

      • SprinkKnoT

        I think you’re over estimating the power of a simple re-roll. Is it good? Yes, but it’s all over AoS and it’s really not game breaking. I also highly expect other factions to have ways to modify their bravery.

        Orc Mob Rule: +1 Ld for every 10 models in a unit
        Tyranid Synapse: Test using the synapse creature’s leadership instead
        IG Commissar: Blam a guy instead of checking (This one I honestly have no idea what to expect)

    • Ian Knight

      Some AoS dwarves get a 5+ ‘save’ against models running away, ATSKNF could be the same

      • Interesting mechanic.

        • No-one Special

          Also a slow mechanic.

  • Gunther Clone C

    I’m getting pangs of the nightmares of “fearless armor saves” for my Tyranids…I’m guessing they’ll have stupid low LD unless within range of a keyword synapse model/unit, in which casse they’d use the synapse creatures LD. Regardless, this could suck for multi-wound model units like warriors, raveners, carnifexes, etc (granted terminators might have same issues, THANK THE FOUR-ARMED EMPEROR FOR THAT!).

    • Jabberwokk

      I think it might be better in some ways. warriors for example have high leadership(currently). Low model count /high wounds would likely very rarely fail a morale test. Though if it did then your losing 3 wound models per point of failure in this case.

      Where as a gaunt blob could get obliterated by such rules like the no retreat rule from 5th.

    • Haighus

      Warriors will probably be immune. They currently come in 3 model units right? Well if they have a Ld of 8 or greater, they will never suffer casualties from this. If they are Ld 7, then the 3rd Warrior could die if the first 2 are killed and they roll a 6 for Morale.

      If Warriors can come in larger units then it starts to have an impact.

      • Marines have Ld7 in 8th. Just as a reminder.

        • Haighus

          Yeah, but Warriors are command beasts, so I would not be at all surprised if they have a decent Ld.

          I’m fully expecting Marine Sergeants to have Ld 8, making them the priority to kill if you want to harm the squad more.

          • Ld8 makes a big difference to 7 though. I’m not sure if I want to see squad-leaders (of any kind) to boost morale that big.

          • Haighus

            True. I guess it depends on how easy moels are to target within units.

            Could also make Veteran Sergeants an upgrade people actually want to take, if they improve Ld.

            For once, Ld actually feels like it matters…

          • Dan Osmond

            I played a game last night between nids and marines and leadership stats had no bearing on the game at all.

          • Haighus

            Yeah, I meant in the new rules. It seems like gaining a few extra Ld will make a big difference to the ability of units to minimise damage.

          • Dan Osmond

            I agree, it will be a welcome change. Too much stuff ignores morale at present.

          • Maitre Lord Ironfist

            aye, but there is stuff that should ignore at least the dmg from shooting or Meele. Like the gaunts i nSynaps range. Why should they beg down due too some losses? In the FLuff their are Mindless thingies that just get thrown at stuff til lthe Job is done. For bitter creatures, wich have more of a, lack of a better word, personality i see the check.

            also what about stuff like Repentia who do not give a damn in the fluff about wounded sisters or death in general? If they are imune too losses by meele and shooting but have too roll if Models lsot by psychic powers, i would be fine.

          • Patriarch

            You could interpret gaunts failing the new morale check as more of them getting mown down by gunfire instead of keeping their heads down like sensible, fearful creatures. In the new system, models don’t actually make rout moves, a number of them just disappear, so you can rationalise what is happening in the game world more than one way.

            Presumably the same thing can happen with daemons – in fact the new rules are similar to daemonic instability as they are now

            Meanwhile heroes, monsters and vehicles won’t normally suffer these kinds of tests since the test doesn’t trigger until after they are dead…

          • davepak

            Its in the text:
            ” dying from the psychic feedback shockwaves of their allies, or retreating with injured or fallen brethren.”

            The first covers nids, the second covers marines.

          • Maitre Lord Ironfist

            mh my point was more, that normal Marines would actually save the Bretheren. But some stuff would jsut not care. Why should an Arco Flagellant do such thing since he is jsut Drugs made alive my more drugs?

          • AircoolUK

            Not likely. For a start I’m presuming that casualty removal is decided by the player who owns the unit suffering those casualties, so you’ll not be getting rid of that sergeant anytime soon.

            Secondly, that would require a second profile for the leader of each unit. With the rules supposedly streamlined, I can’t see that.

            However, I may be wrong.

          • Haighus

            Well, I never found it particularly troubling that a unit had a different profile for squad leaders. I think the game will lose a bit of variety if they make sergants no different, and if they make them different in weaponry, why not also in stats?

            Although I agree that they probably won’t make them have a better Ld, unless you are paying points for it perhaps.

          • davepak

            The difference will be in the statsheet – for example, in AOS now it says something like “one of the models is a X, and it has YZ”.

            Take a look at the AOS warscrolls, they are very interesting in looking at the types of things they have done.

      • SprinkKnoT

        That’s very similar to AoS. Many “elite” multiwound units have bravery scores that they can’t actually use unless they are taken in a larger than minimum sized group.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      I think you are probably right about Synapse being a Leadership bubble.

      The game is looking at casualties, not wounds for morale tests. So a unit of 3 Carnifexes with a Ld 8 Synapse would need to lose all 3 Carnifexes before they could lose any to a failed morale test.

      • Andrew

        Carnifexes are currently fearless. This might change but at the moment they are only subject to Instinctive Behaviour, not morale.

        • AircoolUK

          Do Carnifexes come in units or as individuals (sorry, can’t be bothered to turn round and pick up the book from the bookshelf)?

          Single units don’t take battleshock tests in AoS because there’s no point. The Bravery stat on heroes is generally for the benefit of other units.

          • Koonitz

            Brood of 1-3.

          • Andrew B

            1-3 Carnifexes in a unit.

  • Dalinair

    All of this is well and good, but let’s face it, it’s barely changing. What matters is dealing with all that deathstar, ally abuse and flyer bs.

    • Allies? How do allies work in 8th?

      • karloss01

        They haven’t said yet, but on the topic of death stars the keywords are meant to sort that out so for example Ultramarine abilities only affect Ultramarines and not ‘friendly units’.

      • AircoolUK

        Probably the same way as AoS – From top down grand alliances, to factions and sub factions.

        Also, in AoS most of the books will have a battalion scroll for an alliance (such as a Sylvaneth and Stormcast battalion) with their own special rules, but requiring a certain composition of units (well, as do all battalion warscrolls).

        However, where AoS does differ is that battalion scrolls not only require minimum units, but you have to pay a points cost for them as well.

        If they leave it open ended like AoS, then you can mix and match units from a grand alliance, but you lose some of the benefits of sticking to one keyword or a particular battalion warscroll.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      if it is like AoS, then you cannot join Independent Characters to Units.

      if it is like AoS, then if you run armies off generic keywords by using multiple army’s units, you wind up losing a lot of benefits.

  • Charon

    And another 1:1 AoS carbon copy.

    • davepak

      yes, and for some rules, that may be a good thing.
      In a way, AOS was a big long playtest.
      So far, what we are seeing is an evolved version of AOS.

      I like it, since it makes it easier to move between the systems – or we might see some of these enhancements back into AOS.

      • Hendrik Booraem VI

        You say that, but on every forum that has both WH40K and AoS pages, WH40K has 10+x as many posts as AoS.

        I don’t think it was nearly well-enough playtested, frankly.

  • Defenestratus

    I can’t tell you how overwhelmed I am at the awesomeness of that Wraithfighter ability.

    It’s just … overpowering my awesomeness detectors. I literally will not be able to go out in public anymore due to the tent in my pants.

    Yeah, just kidding.

    (Who am I kidding really though, its existing abilities didn’t work on 75% of the units in the game anyways so I don’t know why I’m generally unimpressed – oh well – at least the mindshock pod still does something)

    • Add some Shadow Spectres and a Death Jester and it may start to hurt already.

      • Defenestratus

        Thats what I was doing with it already.

        We’ll see what else comes down the line… really the hemlock is awesome because of its combination of the mindshock pod with the psychic powers it can use. On certain units it was a real threat. On most though it was an afterthought. Either way – its doing in the rules what they say it does in the fluff so I’m ok with that.

        • Yea. But we can only hope they don’t cost 180 freaking points anymore for a paper-armour-flyer with 2 hull points.

          • Defenestratus

            The hemlock has three IIRC. And its points value was justified when not fighting morale-immune space marines. Can’t tell you how many necrons I’ve made run away in terror from it!

          • Haighus

            That is also super fluffy- those dastardly Eldar using their Warp mastery for which we have no answer. Very Old Ones vs C’tan.

          • Defenestratus

            Making Necrons flee is kind of a hobby of mine inside the hobby. In fact I have a specific “Tin Bitz Tank Shocking Rhino” that I had for my GK (it was base coated but never finished) that tank shocked a full unit of Necron warriors off the board and caused them to phase out once. It was one of those epic moments that only can happen in 40k and many LOLs were had by all.

          • Haighus

            I had a similar moment when I Tank shocked 400pts of Chaos Terminators off the board with a Chimera after they had just Deepstriked in. Epic stuff.

  • D_Ork

    So if a 5-man squad with an LD of 7 loses two models and rolls a 6 on morale, the remaining three models flee. If a 30-Ork mob with an LD of 7 takes loses two models and rolls a 6 on morale, will the remaining 28 models flee? I assume not, since a larger unit should be more resilient, not less.

    Perhaps LD will scale with unit size?

    If so, would that require squad/mob size options to be set in stone for all armies?

    • The 28 Orks don’t flee, but 3 will. So 25 Orks remaining. There won’t be any fleeing anymore.

      • D_Ork

        Ah, I missed that – thanks.

    • Haighus

      No, it equals the number lost- so the 5 man unit will lose an additional model: D6 roll of a 6 + 2 models lost = 8.
      8 is 1 less than 7, so 1 model lost.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      No.

      A 5-Man Squad loses 2 models and rolls a 6 for Morale.

      2 (models lost) + 6 (Morale Roll) = 8
      8 – 7 (Leadership) = 1.

      So they lose 1 model.

  • Raven Jax

    My only concern is something that I did not like from my first play-through of Age of Sigmar, which is two-wound models. My Khorne opponent loses a guy, he lost 1 wound. I lose a Stormcast, I’ve lost 2 wounds.

    • Your 2 wound models make their unit more durable.

    • Defenestratus

      I had the same concern but in reverse. Units consisting of 2W models are going to effectively be twice as resilient to taking morale checks than 1W models – BUT when they fail it will hurt a LOT more.

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        Small units of Terminators will be effectively immune to morale.

        • davepak

          Excellent point. Hopefully their costs will be adjusted (yes, I know – some players will scream – but I have a ton of termies, it will be ok).

      • SprinkKnoT

        As long as the points make sense I think it’ll even out. Multi-damage weapons are a bigger threat to multiwound models, since 2W models will end up losing the same number of models as a 1W model squad.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      But he has to deal twice as much damage to you to make it so you have to roll a Morale Check because this system looks at models killed, not wounds caused.

  • SprinkKnoT

    Now we just have to pray that “This model ignores rules X,Y, and Z” are gone. Models should not ignore another player’s rules.

    • Maitre Lord Ironfist

      well but there is Stuff like repentia who are gladly dieing, i do not see them breaking due to normal dmg – Psychic dmg might be something differend.

      • Leif Leegard

        Keep the Stubborn rule to show this. No negative modifier do to normal unit loss in CC…

        Would still have to take a check though, and magic/fear effects can still adjust your roll as not from normal damage effect.

  • ZeeLobby

    Absolutely fine with me. In the end the AoSifying of 40K just means I’ll play one or the other and not both. More money in my pocket :D. I’d end up being poor if both were simultaneously appealing.

    • Graham Bartram

      I like your logic. If you are going to play another game, make it a different game.

      • ZeeLobby

        Exactly. I might have been able to make an exception if the old world fluff had remained, cause then I could delve into all the literature and history there, but imo where AoS went wrong was blowing all that up. It’ll still exist in 40K, I don’t know why they didn’t just do that (probably cause they wanted to come up with a bunch of stuff they could copyright).

        • kloosterboer

          The IP stuff may or may not have had a hand in their decision to move on from the Old World…But AOS gives them greater license to explore new mythologies, without being bound by the history and geography of the world we knew ( and loved).

          I like the new stuff. That said, I also play AOS rules in the Old World.

          • ZeeLobby

            To be fair, there was a ton of the old world left unexplored. Or heck, advance it a thousand years. They didn’t have to blow it up and create a bunch of places and characters that had no history and I personally could care less about.

  • Heinz Fiction

    Not sure if i like this as it punishes quishy horde units like hormagaunts who usually lose a lot of models disproportionally.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Yes and no. it means they take more casualties but it also means they will not run away. Give and take.

      • Heinz Fiction

        Smaller, tougher units won’t run away either, and they take less leadership related casualities because they take less normal casualties. I hope GW is aware of this when assigning point values.

    • Nyyppä

      Marine assaults got better though.

    • davepak

      We don’t know all the details yet – in AOS for example, orks get bonuses based on the number of models they have, and other gear.

      As a tyranid player (who has been waiting for a good codex for a long time) I have some hesitations – I get that – but so far 8ths is looking really good.

  • piglette

    GOOD. I play both orks and Dark Eldar, I’m really sick of being vulnerable to morale when most my enemies aren’t.

    • SprinkKnoT

      I play Dark Eldar and I’m really sick of all my morale influencing gear being worthless. I’m so excited to see SM players react to one of their marines running away,

      • Leif Leegard

        I can see us SM’s getting a re-roll on our moral check as replacement rule for our ATSNNF. Like the Dwarves get in AoS to represent their stubbornness.

        But yah, makes it so leadership modifier abilities are playable and effective again on everyone.

        I’m a DA player and I’m ok with it. If I’m not gunning you DE’s down fast enough and letting myself get in CC, it’s my fault not yours.

  • silashand

    Battleshock it is then…

  • Hendrik Booraem VI

    I never understood people complaining about morale checks. Granted, Space Marines aren’t usually impacted by them very much, but I lost a game to a Tau player once because a Space Marine tactical squad broke and ran twice in one shooting phase.

    It shouldn’t happen often, especially for Space Marines, but it CAN happen, and that makes for real entertainment sometimes.

    • What do you mean, it ran twice? You only did one moral-check per turn per unit.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      You only roll Morale once per phase in 7th.

      • Hendrik Booraem VI

        Huh, how about that. I must’ve been remembering 5th edition or something. Used to be, a unit had to take a morale check immediately on losing 25% of its models, instead of waiting for the end of the phase.

        I think I prefer the old way. Down with 7th edition!

  • Andrew

    More AOS Garbage

    • AoS means ‘Age of Simplification’, doesn’t it?

    • Admiral Raptor

      You should probably quit and sell or burn your miniatures. It’s all AoS from here on out! Hopefully next edition just merges them both into one game a la Warmahordes.

      • Graham Bartram

        I have no problem with the new rules but no! That would not be good at all. The AOS fluff is just soooo bad.

    • AircoolUK

      Don’t forget to post a link to the video when you set your army aflame.

    • davepak

      Giving the benefit of the doubt that you are not a troll, what constructive criticisms do you have about the direction the new rules are taking?

  • Nice way to balance out large multiwound elite units versus single wound units.

    Less likely to take a test and you will be testing on higher numbers since you lose less models overall, however when you do test they go by by.

  • mgdavey

    What does “a dice” mean?

    • You mean because of “a die”?

      • David Leimbach

        Both are correct.

        • Not really. A die, many dice. I know ‘a dice’ is often said, but according to dictionaries, it’s wrong. ‘dice’ is plural.

        • Graham Bartram

          No they are not. Please stop murdering the English language.

    • MechBattler

      To cut into small pieces. Such as dicing carrots or meat for a stew.

  • Admiral Raptor

    Good to see Battleshock ported directly to 40k. Far better than the worthless leadership mechanics we have now. Hopefully ATSKNF and other leadership based shenanigans are cut as well.

    • Matthew Pomeroy

      I have to disagree here, I absolutely hate the battleshock mechanic.

  • Jeremy Larson

    Personally this is the worst news yet about 8th. I’ve been really excited about most, but I’ve seen way too many easy ways to abuse this in AoS, and that’s a system that DOESN’T focus on shooting. Basically you shoot a unit to just under half strength, and let the morale check kill the rest. It also gives HUGE benefits to running MSU and really harms any thing else.

    • Based on a couple of years of playing AOS now, that is simply not really a problem or really true.

      AOS top tier lists also heavily focus on shooting. If you aren’t running a lot of shooting you aren’t deemed “competitive”.

      It keys into using your command abilities to mitigate battleshock as well as other abilities that lessen it. Additionally if an entire army is shooting at just one of your units, thats great. That lets the other units operate and do their thing.

      If what you said was anywhere near the truth you wouldn’t be seeing the big units in AOS that you do. GW writes rules into the scrolls to give benefits for running larger units, such as additional attacks.

      I’d wait to see everything and actually play a few games first.

  • Rafał Pytlak

    And They Shall know Fear…finnaly

    • We don’t know that yet.

    • Don’t hold your breath. If their leadership is high or they get to re-roll or their squad leaders give them immunity to battleshock then it goes back to being what its always been.

      • Their leadership is 7, we already know that. But we don’t know what ATSKNF special rule will do – and they will surely have it.

        • Yeah. Leadership 7 is not bad in AOS for line units. ATSKNF will likely make their battleshock tests negligible. I’m already banking on that.

          • davepak

            7 is pretty amazing, consider tests are one die and marines don’t die in hordes like gants or orks. Marines will be fine, like always.

      • Rafał Pytlak

        Maybe, but i hope they lose ATSKNF. Overpowered

  • Emprah

    And they suddenly know fear!

  • Rainthezangoose

    sweeting advances wont be missed but actually falling back and regrouping was a fun and thematic mechanic id rather seen fix then replaced.

    • Haighus

      Well, they shifted Fall back into something to escape from melee instead.

  • Matthew Pomeroy

    so far batting .000 for me, I hate battleshock mechanic.

  • MechBattler

    Eh…. this means there’s a threshold where the test becomes impossible to pass and the target unit breaks and flees automatically.
    That sounds like it would be really easy for super good shooting armies to exploit by focusing fire until a unit is guaranteed to fail and flee.
    SIGH. Tau win big again.

    I thought this edition was supposed to bring balance back between melee and shooting? Looks to me like this combined with unlimited overwatch will guarantee nothing ever gets near Tau again.

    Did GeeDubs ACTUALLY test these rules before deciding on them?

  • Me

    So… Probably a stupid question, but say you have a big unit of 30 models (IG, Orks, etc…), it looses 5, you roll really bad and loose five more. That leaves 20 units. If you loose five more next turn, do you add five or fifteen to the next roll?

    I apologize if someone has already asked, but there are a lot of comments, and I may have missed it.

    • Haighus

      It would be 5 to the next roll I think. They are wording it as a per-turn thing.