One Tiny Rule, One Big Debate: Rank Bonus Before or After Combat?
We love those very normal hobby moments when a quick rules question turns into a full-on design discussion. This time, we ended up deep in the weeds over a classic Warhammer Fantasy problem: when exactly should rank bonus and Unit Strength count for combat resolution and morale-related outcomes — before combat, or after casualties are removed?
It started with a disagreement
The whole thing kicked off with a simple enough exchange: Michał wasn’t fully convinced by one interpretation, and Staś immediately pointed out that we had never played it that way. And honestly, that was the first sign this was one of those rules questions — the kind where changing one timing detail suddenly affects a lot more than you’d expect.
“We’ve never played it like that. That would change a lot.”
And that really is the heart of it. In rank-and-flank Warhammer, timing matters. A lot.
Digging into older editions
Staś started checking older references and found that in 6th edition Warhammer Fantasy Battles, the wording pointed toward resolving some of this before the effects of combat had fully changed the unit state.
That immediately made the whole issue more interesting, because it showed that this wasn’t just us misremembering something — there really was precedent for the “before” interpretation.
[Image: screenshot or photo of the relevant 6th edition combat resolution reference]
And of course that led to the most relatable reaction possible:
“How can they not explain this properly in the rulebook… unbelievable.”
Honestly: mood.
The lore argument vs the design argument
The best part of the discussion was that it didn’t stop at “what does the text say?” We also went into the much more fun territory of what makes sense in-universe and what makes sense from a game design perspective.
Staś summed it up really nicely from both sides.
The “before combat” logic
A big unit should have better morale. It’s harder to break a large, solid formation than a tiny remnant. From that angle, it makes sense to count things like rank bonus and Unit Strength based on the unit as it stood before the fighting happened. The regiment went into combat with mass, depth, and confidence — so maybe that should matter when deciding how steady it remains.
The “after combat” logic
On the other hand, if a big unit gets hit so hard that it’s no longer really a big unit by the end of the fight, then it also makes sense that its morale should drop accordingly. If the front rank has been smashed in and the formation is collapsing, maybe you shouldn’t still benefit from all the structural advantages you had a few moments earlier.
And that’s a very Warhammer kind of tension: do we reward the original formation, or reflect the immediate battlefield chaos?
The double punishment problem
This was probably our favorite argument in the whole exchange.
Staś pointed out that if a unit takes heavy losses, it is already being punished in combat resolution, because every wound contributes directly to the result. So if, on top of that, the same casualties also strip away rank bonus and Unit Strength for the same combat result calculation, then the unit is effectively being punished twice for the same event.
That feels rough.
Or, as Staś put it in a beautifully unexpected legal framing:
“That’s contrary to Western European legislative practice.”
We’re absolutely keeping that phrase for future rules debates.
Then came the modern twist
Michał mentioned that the answer he had pasted earlier came from new Hashut, which immediately introduced the correct level of caution. Useful? Maybe. Definitive? Well… let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
A bit later, Staś found a Reddit discussion suggesting that in Warhammer: The Old World, this had been changed to after.
And that is a really important detail, because it suggests Games Workshop may have intentionally moved away from the older logic. If true, it means the ambiguity isn’t just accidental confusion between players — it may reflect a genuine rules evolution between editions.
[Image: screenshot of the Reddit thread or a relevant page from The Old World rules discussion]
Michał’s response was basically the perfect ending to the whole exchange:
“That’s super useful input. I need to learn how to suggest things like that to Hashut.”
Why we enjoy these rabbit holes
This was one of those conversations that reminds us why old-school Warhammer rules discussions are so fun. Even a narrow question about timing opens up bigger topics:
- how different editions approached morale,
- whether combat resolution should reflect momentum or aftermath,
- and how much rules writing can shape the feel of the battlefield.
It also reminds us that a lot of the hobby happens between games: in chats, in links to old rule references, in half-serious theorycrafting, and in trying to reconstruct what the designers probably meant.
We didn’t set out to write an essay on rank bonus timing, but here we are.
And honestly? That’s the hobby.
Our takeaway
We don’t have a grand universal ruling to hand down here, because the whole point of the discussion was that different editions seem to support different answers, and the wording is not always as clear as it should be.
But we did walk away with two strong impressions:
- The “before” interpretation has real historical grounding, at least in older Warhammer Fantasy context.
- The “after” interpretation seems to be an intentional shift in The Old World, which changes the feel of combat quite a bit.
And maybe most importantly: if a rule question leads to lore reasoning, design analysis, legal jokes, and a mini research session across editions, then it was a good hobby conversation.
Do you play this as before or after in your games? And do you prefer the older Warhammer Fantasy feel, or the apparent Old World approach?
Let us know — we’re always happy to fall into another rules rabbit hole.