[Silver]

Hello.
I've been reading codex one more time, and I've come to notice a thing that seemed interesting to me. Horrorfex entry says that affected unit should roll a leadership test. If it fails it, the unit becomes pinned. The big rulebook says that fearless units always pass morale and pinning tests (as opposed to some old codexes where it would be "pass morale tests and cannot be pinned"). As far as I understand, leadership tests and pinning tests are different tests. Does it mean, that as long as we are following RAW, horrorfexes can pin a fearless unit? Or I simply should read through codex and rulebook a couple dozen times more?

 

[Archon Charybdis]

Hello.
I've been reading codex one more time, and I've come to notice a thing that seemed interesting to me. Horrorfex entry says that affected unit should roll a leadership test. If it fails it, the unit becomes pinned. The big rulebook says that fearless units always pass morale and pinning tests (as opposed to some old codexes where it would be "pass morale tests and cannot be pinned"). As far as I understand, leadership tests and pinning tests are different tests. Does it mean, that as long as we are following RAW, horrorfexes can pin a fearless unit? Or I simply should read through codex and rulebook a couple dozen times more?

Technically by RAW that is correct, but it has more to do with 3rd ed artifacting than the anything else. Its like the GK force weapon issue, it may technically be correct but you wont make any friends arguing that.

 

[KwiKwag]

Technically by RAW that is correct, but it has more to do with 3rd ed artifacting than the anything else. Its like the GK force weapon issue, it may technically be correct but you wont make any friends arguing that.

Silver has the right mind-set, you can play the RAW game but its going to make you look funny (or should I say not funny at all).

For me,

If the unit can not be pinned then pinning them with a Horrorfex is not going to work - I guess I am just not that desperate.

 

[Silver]

Thank you.
I understand that this situation wouldn't be really friendly. I just want to clarify this for myself. In case I meet a player that I don't want to be friendly to. :act-up:
I suppose, there are such opponents in every tournament, really. And I tend to get such opponents too often for my liking.

 

[Archon Charybdis]

If you do plan on attempting that in a tournament, just be sure to check with the TO first. The last thing you want is to move your unit in position to fire only to have somebody gripe to a judge and have it ruled against you.

 

[Krovin-Rezh]

The March FAQ changed this. The rule now reads as follows:

"...[they] must pass a Leadership test or go to ground by failing a pinning test."

The wording is a little silly with the change, but it effectively means that the Leadership test mentioned is describing a pinning test and not some other generic type of test that isn't covered under fearless.

So fearless units do indeed ignore 'fexes, sorry to say. :\

 

[Silver]

Hmm. The thought messes with my brain, but still: at least technically there could be another loophole. There are some units who can pass a test even if a failure is automatic - for example, =][= lords. So, it is not theoretically impossible that a unit can fail a test that it passes automatically. After all, these words say that units go to ground after failing a pinning test, not that they should make such a test. So, it bears a resemblance to passing a auto-fail test, in my opinion.
Just to clarify: at the moment I am considering this question as almost purely theoretical. But I am still interested in the answer.

 

[KwiKwag]

If you weigh the arguement to that in how it will affect the game I would say its not worth it.

I personally avoid conflict when playing a game and if there is a lot of reasoning needed to interpret a "gray area" then I will usually pass on trying to make an opponent or judge to see it my way. That's just how I roll, figure it out before you start playing and I try not to "spring" any expectations on an opponent.

So if a player with a fearless army expects that he can not be pinned then I am not going to get into the 2nd turn and surprise him and then go into a lengthy discussion on leadership tests and pinning checks.

On a side-note, I get a sense that GW was considering the use of different levels of fear (just like fantasy warhammer, fear and terror) when they made our codex. In fantasy games, terror causing units or weapons overides fear causing items. It just may be that GW intended terror based weapons to be able to affect fearless based units. For example, the "terrorfying opponent" rule the grotesques have - you get the feeling that being terrorfying would still work against fearless units.

But like most of our codex, I see a lot of Dark Elf fantasy references and perhaps they were stealing ideas from the dark elves and just throwing them into a 40k codex.

 

[Silver]

I suppose, you are right, really. Maybe it would really be dishonest.