Question for the wise men of Druchii.net!

[Dirty Mac]

OK, I will start off with this, the reason I started Dark Elves was this forum.

I respect you all, and your knowledge of the game.

So I put forth to you a question, a question about the "Steadfast" Rule.

Now, The steadfast rule states that if you have more ranks than your opponent, then you take break tests on unmodified leaderships.
So in the event that say a chariot charged a unit of 10 Swordsmen with FC for example and killed 5 men. no other wounds were caused by either unit.
The chariot wins combat by 5 with the standard cancelling out the charge by the chariot.

This is where it gets tricky, the general consensus is the swordsmen are steadfast, because they have more ranks than the chariot.

Is this true though?

I will post my thoughts in a minute, I just wanted to see what you guys think.

[Calisson]

Assuming the initial setting of swordsmend was 5 wide or more, i.e. there was a full rank.
End of combat:
swordsmen = 1 full rank
chariot = 0 full rank

Swordsmen steadfast ideed.

[Thraundil]

If there are 5 swordsmen, they have what constitutes a full rank. The chariot has none, so swordsmen have more ranks = they are steadfast.

Same result if a pegasus master charges 10 HE archers and kills 5 of them. They are steadfast. You need to reduce a unit to 4 models before a single chariot or monster can ever deny them steadfast.

At least, this is what I understand from it. Its silly, yes, but it is I believe meant to give units of 10 guys a chance to hold up enemy biggies for just a round.

[Calisson]

It seems sure strange to see 5 spear goblins steadfast when a dragonlord charged them on the flank and annihilated half of them in a single strike, but that's the rule.

[Dirty Mac]

The reason I asked was the book states , when counting ranks, you don't count the fighting rank.
But it has been pointed out to me that it has been changed in the FAQ, and you do indeed count the fighting rank when resolving Steadfast.

[Blackphantom]

FAQ:
Page 54 – Loser Takes a Break Test, Steadfast.
Change the first paragraph to “If a defeated unit has more
ranks than its enemy, it takes a Break test without applying the
difference in the combat result scores.” Change the fourth
paragraph to “Steadfast units don’t apply the difference in
combat result scores to Break tests.”

can't find anything in brb or faq about fighting rank not being count. so i agree with the others, 5 R&F models= always steadfast against a chariot

[Dalamar]

You don't count the fighting rank for rank bonus only.

Steadfast with its flaws is a good rule. Before steadfast existed, infantry was all but useless. A single dragon would obliterate entire armies.

[Dirty Mac]

FAQ:
Page 54 – Loser Takes a Break Test, Steadfast.
Change the first paragraph to “If a defeated unit has more
ranks than its enemy, it takes a Break test without applying the
difference in the combat result scores.” Change the fourth
paragraph to “Steadfast units don’t apply the difference in
combat result scores to Break tests.”

can't find anything in brb or faq about fighting rank not being count. so i agree with the others, 5 R&F models= always steadfast against a chariot

When counting ranks for combat res, it states you don't count the fighting rank, and then under steadfast it says count ranks like you do for combat res, so you don't cont the fighting rank, which is probably why they FAQ'd it.

This is the full entry in the FAQ, for this rule.

Page 54- Loser Takes a Break Test, Steadfast.
Change the first paragraph to “If a defeated unit has more
ranks than its enemy, it takes a Break test without applying the
difference in the combat result scores. You should include the front rank
for the purposes of determining whether or not a unit is steadfast.

So This is why I asked my question, But it has been answered in the FAQ, so it's all good.