Fear (shaken) rule request

[Hannibal]

Well if we're basing (-1) -0/-0 on the aspect that the dude is bigger with longer reach (yay, old phalanx rules make a comeback!), then it makes sense to affect everyone. 

And it's also simpler.

[Niko White]

Well if we're basing (-1) -0/-0 on the aspect that the dude is bigger with longer reach (yay, old phalanx rules make a comeback!), then it makes sense to affect everyone. 

And it's also simpler.

Obviously I agree but I never play Dwarves (bad Orcs!) and I know lots of Dwarfy people love their Longbeards a lot, so I didn't want to be a total jerk about it.

(Might as well keep people guessing after all!  )

[Hannibal]

Obviously I agree but I never play Dwarves

Just thumped me some Dark Elves with Dwarves last Friday.  (Of course, that has more to do with my opponent being stoned than my tactical acumen)

and I know lots of Dwarfy people love their Longbeards a lot, so I didn't want to be a total jerk about it.

(Might as well keep people guessing after all!  Grin )

Well, the shaken rules have been around for awhile and we haven't heard a chorus of "my Celestial Guard/Knights/other 400+ pt unit just suuuucks now!" so I think it'll be fine.

Frankly, I think people will more likely understand that a Large unit makes it harder for you to engage it than "Those Celestial Guard?  Yeah they get the willies against Slavetakers..."

[Kevin]

OK then, so the consensus is:

Something bigger than you charges you:  you get (-1) -0/-0 this turn.
Something scary charges you:  Make a fear check (at -2 if it's terrifying and you unit isn't fearsome) and get (-1) -1/-1 this turn if you blow it.

Works for me!

One request, though:

Can we please call the (-1) -0/-0 modifier something other than shaken? Maybe "outreached?"  Otherwise lots and lots of players who aren't on the message boards will wonder how "shaken" works with fearless units.

[RushAss]

It might be worth writing the Longbeards out of it specifically because they seem to be immune to Fear at least in large part because they've got a monster slayer type flavor, but I'm agnostic on that point.

I think The Beards should keep the attack die because after all, Dwarves are used to fighting enemies that are larger than them 

[Niko White]

OK then, so the consensus is:

Something bigger than you charges you:  you get (-1) -0/-0 this turn.
Something scary charges you:  Make a fear check (at -2 if it's terrifying and you unit isn't fearsome) and get (-1) -1/-1 this turn if you blow it.

Works for me!

One request, though:

Can we please call the (-1) -0/-0 modifier something other than shaken? Maybe "outreached?"  Otherwise lots and lots of players who aren't on the message boards will wonder how "shaken" works with fearless units.

I assumed a different name was more or less a given

[BubblePig]

But the only terrifying non-colossal units are Dusk Lords and Covens, and they almost never charge anyone.  That seems a lot more complex for not a lot of reason.

A. the change is merely one of quantity not quality
B. Coven charge plenty
C. I was suggesting it before it was clarified that:
     fear gives (-1)-1/-1 not (-0)-1/-1
     neo-shaken (overborne?, trampled?) is a reach issue

[Niko White]

Fair enough, I guess I just mostly meant that the issue seemed unlikely to come up often, and didn't seem likely to make them too good.

I think Terror is probably fine with the -1 die on fail, especially if it is/becomes -2 to the check.

[ZiNOS]

Why not call this ability reach?

And it is very flavoursome for the Dwarves to not be affected by this (reminds of AD&D modifiers for the dwarves ) but  then it gets very complicated. It sure can be used as a house rule but posting more errata? Nah....

my $0.05

[Kevin]

Why not call this ability reach?

Because the condition affects the opponent.  Hence, "outreached."

Hey, just a little reminder that I'm still hoping that these conditions are made engaged-only modifiers, so that pila/javelins don't get double-hosed.  I think everyone was on board with that, but let's not lose it in the shuffle as the new rules are codified.

[Dave-SWA]

OK, I am working on the tournament rules clarification document with Kevin.  He suggested I look up this thread.  As I read the whole thread, I think something mistakenly slipped into the dialog.

My basic understanding:

• Fear checks from Fearsome units roll vs current Courage value, no modifier.
• Fear checks from Terrifying units roll vs current Courage value, -1 modifier.

But it seems somehow a -2 modifier is being mentioned here and there for Terrifying units.

Is this the final, clearly agreed-upon decision?  I think this is a bad idea.

My hunch is Chad mistakenly typed -2 when he meant -1 in his March 9 2011 post.  But then some other folks took the idea and ran with it.

For the record, I also don't like weakening Fear checks by having them only when the fearsome unit is charging.  I think there should be a possible effect for troops being ordered in against a fearsome unit, even if that unit is already locked in combat.  With a successful courage roll, there is no effect.


Here is what I am writing into the rules addenda document:

2.2     Fear Checks
     Fear checks are now only required when charged by a fearsome or terrifying unit. 
     If your unit fails a required fear check, it is “Frightened” and gets a (-1)/-1/-1 penalty for the remainder of the turn.  A unit that passes the fear check suffers no penalty.
     A unit that normally “Passes all Courage Checks”, “Passes all Fear Checks” or has no Courage level number is immune to the Frightened penalty.
     Frightened penalties only modify engaged attacks, not ranged attacks (including javelins & pila).
     The concept of a unit being “Shaken” (3.2.3.1.2) has been removed from the game.

Outreached – New Rule
     If a unit larger than your unit charges you, you are “outreached” and get an automatic (-1)/0/0.  This penalty is in addition to any Frightened penalty that unit may suffer.  The outreached penalty only modifies engaged attacks, not ranged attacks (including javelins & pila).


However, I would like to lobby to retain that any unit entering combat with a fearsome or terrifying unit be subject to the fear roll. 

I'm totally OK with only being "outreached" when charged. 
But, can we come up with a better term than "outreached"?

-DC

[Dave-SWA]

New request.

Can a forum moderator please move this entire thread out of the "Player Requests" to the "Rules" section?

It took me quite a while to find it.

Thanks,
-DC

[UvulaBob]

I'm not the best Rules Designer Guy in the world, but is there a reason why we can't do this:

Reach
A unit that charges a unit smaller than itself gains (+1) 0/0 against the unit it charged for that turn. 

I know the idea is that a unit should be penalized for being charged by something bigger than it rather than a larger unit getting a bonus for charging something smaller. And I get that those are two very different things. But the concept of Reach seems more intuitive than the concept of Outreached. Is it worth using such a weird phrase as "outreached"?

[Kevin]

Breaking with all previous rules and venturing into fully known territory, not to mention tossing a huge amount of back-and-forth into the trash, for the sake of a prettier word seems a bit excessive, no?

That said, I don't think anybody is married to the word "outreached"  that was an off-the-cuff suggestion to replace "shaken" now that it has nothing to do with a unit's fear (or even it being immune to fear).  If you have a better word, fire away!

[Zelc]

Is there any way to consolidate the large creature rules with high ground?  Large = 10', Colossal = 20'?