Leadership unpinning bubble

[enyoss]

Hi all,

Yet another question - so thanks in advance for the help

According to the special rules for Gang Leaders: "any fighter within 6" of the gang leader can us the Initiative characteristic of the leader when testing to escape pinning early."

My question: is the intention that fighters within the 6" bubble are also granted the ability to unpin due to the leader's presence? For example, as it reads now a pinned fighter within 6" of the leader but not within 2" of a friendly model is unable to even attempt to unpin.

I don't think this is necessarily the problem, but is it how people are playing it?

I only ask as during a game yesterday this situation came up, and our conventional wisdom (i.e. before I read into the rules a bit more last night) was that fighters could not only use the Initiative value, but were granted the ability to unpin as well.

Cheers!
enyoss

 

[Draakeragon]

So the leader of a gang doesn't only give his LD to fighters in range but his I aswell?
I don't think a fighter can use his Leader bestowed Skill to make sure he can help unpin a nearby fighter out of the leaders range!
If you want to get a fighter out of pinning faster you have to move your leader nearby

 

[Ben_S]

This had a good discussion a few months ago:
https://yaktribe.games/community/threads/clarification-leaders-i-to-escape-pinning.4058/

I think the consensus was that the Leader does not grant you the ability to test, only allows you to use their I if you can already test. I thought this was going to get clarified in NCE, but I don't know whether it was re-worded for greater clarity.

 

[Fold]

It was clarified thusly (hence the "when testing to escape pinning early" wording.

The embarrassing thing here is that I requested and in fact wrote the wording that ended up being added, and yet I was the dolt who then went and played it wrongly yesterday against @enyoss, this triggering this thread again

Sorry, @enyoss, and indeed everyone else for causing this to be dragged up again! I'll go and sit in the naughty corner...

Although this thread does beg the question of whether the altered wording was actually not explicit enough!

 

[Ben_S]

Although this thread does beg the question of whether the altered wording was actually not explicit enough!

as it reads now a pinned fighter within 6" of the leader but not within 2" of a friendly model is unable to even attempt to unpin.
...
I only ask as during a game yesterday this situation came up, and our conventional wisdom (i.e. before I read into the rules a bit more last night) was that fighters could not only use the Initiative value, but were granted the ability to unpin as well.

From the sounds of it, the wording is perfectly clear, as @enyoss had no trouble. The problem comes when you don't read the rules! I know how it's easy it is to accidentally use some other version of rules, from a different edition or a different game (40k etc) though.

 

[enyoss]

From the sounds of it, the wording is perfectly clear, as @enyoss had no trouble. The problem comes when you don't read the rules!

Yup, that pretty much sums it up .

There have been a few cases recently though where I've been interested to see if the rules as written are the rules we're used to playing (e.g. the recent Overwatch thread is a good example). Seeing as we played this incorrectly I thought I'd see how common that was.

For the record, I'm not trying to push for a rules change or anything - just want to double check we're playing it as intended.

 

[Ben_S]

Yeah, there are times when - although the RAW is fairly clear if read carefully - there's room to wonder whether or not that was the author's original intention. However, there's a limit to how far the rules can really go in explicitly ruling out other possibilities ('the rule is X, and X does not mean Y').

I tend to assume basic competence on the part of the author and thus that the rule he wrote is the one he intended, unless the RAW is so crazy there's reason to think that it couldn't be the intention.

 

[Anthony]

It was clarified thusly (hence the "when testing to escape pinning early" wording.

Although this thread does beg the question of whether the altered wording was actually not explicit enough!

Hmm... I just had a look at an earlier NCE version and the wording seems the same and there isn't anything in the change log so I don't know if I just forgotten to clarify it. If I recall correctly I intended to separate off the first paragraph into its own rule called Independent (which conforms with the Bounty Hunter's rule). As others said, the rules are already clear it's just that people seem to jumble the two bonuses up since they are both part of the Leader rule.

 

[Fold]

You're right. I'm sure I proposed specific wording that had been accepted by others, and it had made it in the September update, but I cannot find the post now.

So let's try this again...

"In addition, any fighter who is able to test to escape pinning early and is within 6" of the leader may use the Initiative characteristic of the leader to do so".

Any better?

 

[enyoss]

Yep, I like that

 

[cardyfreak]

I honestly don't see why the leaders sphere can't allow a model to test to escape pinning early without having a friendly fighter within 2". Otherwise what's the point? It's far more simple to just have the leadership bubble allow early tests and Ld bonuses based on the 6" sphere rather than having caveats like 'they can use his I if he's within 6", but only if there's another fighter who is 2" away'. Just seems really unintuitive.
However I would clarify the caveat that if a fighter benefits from the 6" sphere then he MUST use the leaders I value and not his own. For example, a fighter would usually test using his own I value of a fighter is within 2". But if the fighter has a higher I than the leader and uses the leaders 6" bubble to test to escape early, he MUST use the leaders lower I to test rather than his own higher I. This would represent the leaders ability to inspire the fighter to get up and fight beyond the fighters better judgement.
That's my two penneth anyhoo.

 

[Fold]

I tried it like that and it felt way too good.

A 12" circle of "very likely to unpin" is really, really strong. Particularly once your leader gains a point of initiative.

 

[cardyfreak]

You still have to risk your leader near the action for it to be in any way useful though. If you're a shooty gang the leader is probably tucked away somewhere with a hunting rifle or something, miles away from everyone so it doesn't really matter. If you're a combat gang then it becomes very useful as it can help to keep momentum going, especially when up against a camping, overwatching gang of Van Saar bearded ladies.
I can see the arguments against it, like how it would make fighters difficult to break as they don't need to be within 2" of each other as the leader would confer the ability to test to recover within 6", but I think it promotes more positive, aggressive play with fighters and encourages leaders to be sent forward more rather than having them 'castle' somewhere and capitalise on their superior bs. Of course, I'm a combat man so I'm biased [emoji6]

 

[Ben_S]

I honestly don't see why the leaders sphere can't allow a model to test to escape pinning early without having a friendly fighter within 2". ... It's far more simple to just have the leadership bubble allow early tests and Ld bonuses based on the 6" sphere rather than having caveats like 'they can use his I if he's within 6", but only if there's another fighter who is 2" away'. Just seems really unintuitive.

We could change the rule if we wanted, but last time it was discussed there didn't seem to be much appetite for change. Of course, people may have differing opinions as to whether the effects of a change would be good (encouraging aggressive play) or bad (over-powered).

I'd disagree, however, with your claim that the change would be simpler. As it is, the Leader's bubble allows you to use the Leader's Ld or I for (certain) tests. The Leader does not give you the ability to take a Leadership test when you otherwise couldn't - for example, it doesn't allow you to recover your nerve while you're in the open and visible to enemies. The same is true of the Leader's effect on pinning tests. That seems about as simple as it gets, to me.

I don't see how this is less simple or intuitive than your proposed alternative, where you add in both an ability to test (within 6") and the bit about having to use the Leader's lower I value unless you are entitled to test anyway - I see the logic to that, but there's no way that it's a simpler or more intuitive rule.

 

[cardyfreak]

The simplicity side of it was more about how, as it currently stands, in order to use the leader's characteristics you have to have;
For Initiative
a) the leader within 6"
and
b) another model within 2"
For leadership;
c) The leader within 6"
If these criteria are met, and the fighter actually has a higher I than the leader, then the fighter can choose to use his own I characteristic rather than the leaders (obviously [emoji28]).
My suggestion is;
In order to use the leader's characteristics you have to have;
For Ld and I;
a) the leader within 6" (caveat: you must use the leader's characteristic to benefit from this rule).
I'm not suggesting that it works for any other tests than it already does, I just think there's an added level of criteria to meet that doesn't necessarily have to be there. It makes leaders kick a bit more arse too, cos let's be honest; what use are they apart from having special weapons, and occasionally stopping like one fighter per game, usually less, from crapping their pants when their mate gets brained off of a lucky shot by a juve with a stubgun [emoji23]

 

[Ben_S]

Well, your condition b) is not quite right: you could have Nerves of Steel, or something else that allows you to escape pinning. But, leaving that aside, you suggest that the criteria for the two cases (of I and Ld) are different, which is wrong. They're exactly the same:

In order to benefit from the Leader's I or Ld you must:
a) be taking a test of the relevant kind
and
b) be within 6" of the Leader when doing so.

As for your own proposal:

My suggestion is;
In order to use the leader's characteristics you have to have;
For Ld and I;
a) the leader within 6" (caveat: you must use the leader's characteristic to benefit from this rule).

That, on its own, is just my b). But it doesn't really make any sense. You can't use the Leader's characteristic if you're not actually taking a test. Hence, you need condition a) too.

What you were proposing before was actually something else, namely giving the Leader two distinct (though complementary) abilities:
i) If you are within 6" of the Leader, you may test to escape pinning
and
ii) If you are within 6" of the Leader, you may (or in some cases must) use his I value for this test.

Certainly giving the Leader both of these abilities, rather than only the latter, makes a difference, and I can see why you might like the difference it makes. But is having two abilities, rather than one, really simpler? Especially when the result is that the Leader's effect on pinning tests is no longer the same as the Leader's effect on Ld tests (because the Leader would then grant an ability to test, which is not the case for Ld tests).

 

[cardyfreak]

Yes the changes I suggest only affect the escape pinning rule, I include the leadership part because mechanically the leader's effect would be exactly the same for both nerve and pinning. The criteria to take both tests have to be met in order for the leader's ability to have an effect, that much isn't in question. I just think it would be easier if pinning tests didn't need both the Leader and another ganger within 2" to have the leader's perk be useful.
The part about having to use the leader's I if testing is secondary really, it's just to temper the perk a little. Early on it might be good, but later on as a leader is injured or whatever the perk might not be so useful. You still might want to keep guys bunched up a little to escape pinning early and rely on the individual fighters I rather than your lobo-chipped leader's I!
But there might be occasions where groups of chaps get pinned by grenades or are being pin-blocked by a sniper or whatever and you don't want to risk sending more guys in to get sniped or fragged; the presence of the leader and his extended range of influence could just get a guy up early and out of trouble and avoid the crappy jack-in-box situations of pin-blocking.
I know these are very specific scenarios, but I can think of quite a few times where being able to get out pinning early when I had no guys close would have saved some incredibly frustrating moments where the mechanics of the game make you want to smash your head against the table.
I've mentioned it twice already, but pin blocking is the best example of what this change would help nullify to a certain degree. Sometimes it's not possible to crawl to cover whilst pinned, and your guy waits behind a tiny bit of cover, stands up in the open at the end of his turn and gets shot straight away. I've had this go on for four turns before, it's infuriating cos I couldn't send a guy in to help escape pinning early cos it was an overwatching alley. A leader standing on the level below would have given my guy a pretty good chance of getting out of that situation, and either hide, get to some decent cover or return fire. I don't think that benefit is particularly overpowered, in fact I think it's incredibly useful. The leadership bonus comes in handy occasionally, this would be similar if not a little better.

 

[trollmeat]

If the bubble let people test to unpin early when within 6" of the leader, then Shooty gangs would benefit as they wouldn't need to send a ganger with each heavy.

but I think it promotes more positive, aggressive play with fighters and encourages leaders to be sent forward more rather than having them 'castle' somewhere

This is why I would be for it. Though perhaps it might work better if the Early Unpin was 6", but not able to use Leader's Initiative at all or only if within 2"...

One way to encourage people to send Leaders into battle, rather than skulking around being useless like a King in Chess, is The Stuff of Heroes house rule where a Leader may reroll a Serious Injury result of Dead, be it 11-15 or a High Impact Double...

 

[spafe]

Pfft, no, leaders are highly charismatic Orators, preachers of the faith if you will, inspiring others with their words on the Emperor, and how to cleanse the mutant with fire, they don't get their finely gloved hands dirty, that's what the deacons are for!

Unless you're not from the only true mighty house Cawdor, then you suck and should charge in with a 6" bubble of taking fools with you to the fiery killing ground of the righteous Cawdor.

Brought to you from your local unbiased propaganda Sermon machine

 

[Fold]

I don't think the rule would only or mainly benefit close combat gangs - why would a shooting gang not set up with their leader in the centre of a group of gangers who would then all become largely unpinnable? In the games where I tried it out I was playing Goliaths against Van Saar, and this is exactly what happened - as a result I couldn't effectively use covering fire to keep the enemies heads down and my assault gangers couldn't close in without being shot down.