|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Nov 19, 2018 23:00:33 GMT
To go back into history a bit. I strongly suspect the inclusion of steadfast in the list of special rules that can confer from the Regimental Unit to the Detachment was a mistake: the author simply forgot that steadfast is not a special rule. It is not a rule a unit can have, it is a rule a unit can only use in a particular situation. That said, there was still the possibility of conferring steadfast in accordance with all the rules, but only if the Regimental Unit and the Detachment were in the same multiple close combat. Many players were very unhappy with that, because they considered this too limited. GW came first up with an FAQ that muddled the issue further. The issue was finally settled by this erratum:
The Empire Official Update Version 1.2, p.1: Page 30 – Army Special Rules, Detachments. Add the following after the second paragraph:
‘Whether or not a Detachment is Steadfast is determined by their Regimental unit. This means that if a Regimental Unit is either not engaged in combat itself, or is engaged in combat and is Steadfast, then all of its detachments are Steadfast, even if fighting an enemy with more ranks. If the Regimental Unit is engaged in combat and is not Steadfast, then none of its detachments can be Steadfast, even if fighting an enemy with less ranks.’
leading to the situation in my earlier post.
|
|
|
Post by vulcan on Nov 19, 2018 23:28:37 GMT
Edit: Ninja'd
So. How would we re-write the rule to avoid that problem?
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Nov 20, 2018 9:21:38 GMT
"To determine whether or not a Detachment is steadfast, you can use either the Detachment's own ranks or those of its Regimental Unit, provided it is within 3"."
Personally, I would be perfectly happy to trade steadfast for the following rules from the older editions:
- Detachments do not cause Panic - Supporting Charge - LOS suffices for flank charge - No -1 for S&S
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Nov 20, 2018 10:09:39 GMT
To go back into history a bit. I strongly suspect the inclusion of steadfast in the list of special rules that can confer from the Regimental Unit to the Detachment was a mistake: the author simply forgot that steadfast is not a special rule. It is not a rule a unit can have, it is a rule a unit can only use in a particular situation. That said, there was still the possibility of conferring steadfast in accordance with all the rules, but only if the Regimental Unit and the Detachment were in the same multiple close combat. Many players were very unhappy with that, because they considered this too limited. GW came first up with an FAQ that muddled the issue further. The issue was finally settled by this erratum:
The Empire Official Update Version 1.2, p.1: Page 30 – Army Special Rules, Detachments. Add the following after the second paragraph:
‘Whether or not a Detachment is Steadfast is determined by their Regimental unit. This means that if a Regimental Unit is either not engaged in combat itself, or is engaged in combat and is Steadfast, then all of its detachments are Steadfast, even if fighting an enemy with more ranks. If the Regimental Unit is engaged in combat and is not Steadfast, then none of its detachments can be Steadfast, even if fighting an enemy with less ranks.’
leading to the situation in my earlier post. Thank you. So the errata made it worse. At least for me when reading BRB and army book I would compare the parent ranks with the ranks of the opponent unit engaging the detachment to determine steadfast.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Nov 20, 2018 10:29:44 GMT
Your solution seems to be what I suggested (if you too allow a choice), but that is not what the AB (with or without the erratum) and BRB actually say. There is no point in re-opening discussion, which, in geardagum, was flogged to death in several threads on warhammer-empire.com, and should be only of historic interest now. However, the AB says to confer steadfast (not ranks) from the Regimental to the Detachment, i.e. the Regimental Unit must be steadfast itself in the first place. Rules as originally written, the only time it can confer steadfast is when both RU & Detchment are taking a Breaktest in the same MCC. To change this would need an erratum in any case.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Nov 20, 2018 16:40:42 GMT
To add further to this superfluous digression: for consistency, the erratum should also erase steadfast from the list of special rules that can be conferred. There will always be something that some will see as odd. For instance, if ranks and not steadfast are conferred, remember that in a building the RU is always steadfast, but has no ranks; while in a river, it is never steadfast (unless Stubborn), but it still will have ranks.
|
|