Pinning Attitudes

[Nabterayl]

This is a not a thread to talk about what the Pinning rules are, or what they should be.

I certainly agree that you should prepare for rules going against you in a tournament (or even better, try to anticipate them in advance and ask the TO). I'm curious about the sense that some players have that multiple checks would be disgusting, broken, or otherwise too powerful, though, since my sense is that Pinning is presently kind of dumb.

Do people actually like the Pinning rules right now? I kind of hate them. I hate that they're a sure-fire bet in conjunction with a very few combinations (markerlighted or Weaken Resolve'd down to Ld2, and then hit with Pinning weapons) and otherwise it can take an entire army of snipers to pin a single unit (and it's not improbable that they'll shoot the whole unit dead before Pinning it).

I certainly acknowledge that a multiple test system would be a big change, but it's one that excites me. When an opponent has lots of Blast weapons, I need to think about how to circumvent that. When he has lots of template weapons, I need to think about how to circumvent that. Same with Rending, and sometimes even Poisoned. But Pinning weapons? It barely registers on my radar as a threat under the single-test system, unless he has a lot of markerlights or a PBS, and sometimes not even then (as many times opponents will use those to do things other than Pin).

Anybody in the "disgusting" camp care to share their thoughts? Anybody else feel like Pinning is just lame right now?

[Culven]

I have always thought Pinning to be a pointless ability. It only works against units that have a low Ld (or can be forced to have a low Ld). I have never counted on it as a tactic, rather viewing it as a possible side effect of Sniper Rifles (which were selected for their ability to wound high toughness units). The potential chance to multiple tests is a big step, and I think it is this drastic change that scares us "olde tymers". However, I think that with the proliferation of high Ld/Fearless units, the multiple tests may be the only way to bring Pinning back into the game as an actual threat.

[DarkLink]

I think in general, shooting is pathetic comparred to CC. In cc, you can absolutely butcher you're opponent. However, taking pot shots with bolters is almost worthless. They need to think up some way to make basic weapons like bolters more intimidating, to make shooting as brutal as CC. More negative Ld modifiers in the core system (and fewer powers like psyker squads) would do that, I think. It would also turn Fearless back into an advantage, since they'd be able to ignore shooting morale, which doesn't really matter much now.

[Old_Paladin]

There is the problem with both wording and play style; regardless of camp. The phrase is open to interpretation, and in most games no one wants to be rolling more then a couple of test (and a single test makes pinning too weak).

I feel a good balance would be to introduce a modifier (like CC does now). It would only be one test, but you get a -1 modifier to leadership for every model that dies after the first [2 models killed, -1 to the test; 4 models, -3 etc.]

I'd also say models, instead of wounds so you don't get other weird interperatations; such as "I killed a single Ogryn with 3 pluse carbines; take 3 tests please!" [which is what the multiple test camp should also believe].

[Nabterayl]

I actually like that idea a lot (and I do believe that about multiple-wound models, from a RAW standpoint, although like you, I acknowledge it's silly).

Your idea would also solve the weirdness, under either single-test or multiple-test, of a sniper rifle that kills one man being no more likely to pin a unit than a mortar that kills three - or for that matter, of a mortar that kills one man being no more likely to pin a unit than a mortar that kills seven. I've never been under live fire, but I would expect that the accuracy of fire contributes significantly to its suppressive effect, and your version would pick that up.

[Mizzrym]

I feel a good balance would be to introduce a modifier (like CC does now). It would only be one test, but you get a -1 modifier to leadership for every model that dies after the first [2 models killed, -1 to the test; 4 models, -3 etc.]


agreed 100%

[DarkLink]

Honestly, why even limit pinning to specific weapons. Insurgent snipers in the real world rarely use actual sniper rifles. A "sniper" is pretty much anyone who takes potshots from a concealed position. But in battle, you're more likely to be pinned down by a heavy machine gun, or RPG's, than single rifle shots. Soldiers aren't stupid, they don't like to charge blindly into enemy fire. Doesn't really matter what type of weapon that fire is coming from.

I like the negative modfier idea. I think it would be cool to see that in all shooting, with a few exceptions. I've killed 10+ models from a single squad's shooting before, and it would obviosly be OP to be forcing Ld tests at -4 or -5 left and right (which I could do with my army). But it would be nice to see morale play an actual role in 40k (and to see Fearless make a difference, too).

I just think it would be awesome to see shooting be as brutal as assault. I bet there'd be a lot more wipeouts in games, too.

[Nabterayl]

Honestly, why even limit pinning to specific weapons. Insurgent snipers in the real world rarely use actual sniper rifles. A "sniper" is pretty much anyone who takes potshots from a concealed position. But in battle, you're more likely to be pinned down by a heavy machine gun, or RPG's, than single rifle shots. Soldiers aren't stupid, they don't like to charge blindly into enemy fire. Doesn't really matter what type of weapon that fire is coming from.
Admittedly, the whole idea of special sniper rifles in 40K is pretty dumb. Everybody knows that the way you use your sniper cadre is to group it into a squad of ten men, put them where the enemy can see them, and volley fire :p

I wouldn't complain a bit if pinning was simply a natural mechanic. For instance, if you did allow heavy shooting to force serious Ld penalty tests, you might be able to suppress squads organically. Might be better to Go to Ground voluntarily than take a Morale test at -5Ld, know what I mean? At least that way you aren't running away.

[Aldramelech]

agreed 100%

Yep, I like that idea too.

[Vince]

Most pinning weapons are super cheap. While it is a useful ability you cant build a list around it. I get a lot of use out of pinning currently and the only 2 ways I can cause it is by using lash and blowing up a rhino. Vs some armies it is amazing and can win you games with one test. While it is hard to pull off when you pin a unit you are making it useless for the next turn. If it was any better it would quickly become overpowered.

[gcsmith]

sum of those ideas are stupid? multiple pinning tests. if u dnt care about one group of snipers i guess u wouldnt care about others, at least if ur that brave.

[Steelbull]

I feel a good balance would be to introduce a modifier (like CC does now). It would only be one test, but you get a -1 modifier to leadership for every model that dies after the first [2 models killed, -1 to the test; 4 models, -3 etc.]


This does make alot of sense. :)

[BuFFo]

Pinning per weapon got my vote.

As it is currently.

Makes pinning just slightly useful. Barely. If at all.

[Lerra]

I really like the idea with the leadership modifier. I'd try to keep it simple, though, and keep it as close to the CC rules as possible.

If you lose CC by 2 wounds, you take a test at -2. If you lose 2 wounds to pinning weapons, you take a test at -2. Keep it based on wounds instead of models - it makes sense to be more afraid when the Ogryn drops dead than when the flimsy guardsman drops dead.

[Melissia]

Of course, modifiers still wouldn't effect my Sisters anyway, even if you managed to kill so many :P ah, how I love my Book of St. Lucius.

[Lord Azaghul]

We all know that GW doesn't like modifiers in 40k any more. So I doubt that's an option.

I pinning test per firing unit. Otherwise mortars and snipers would be far more expensive.