I went to a tournament this weekend and several rule debates occured. Since I am usually asked to be the RL at our LGS, I just wanted to know how you guys interpretted the folowwing:

Warptime, Codex: Chaos Space Marines: "...may re-roll all to hit and all to wounds..."

I never though someone would argue on this, but never read the rule in details until then: Does this mean if the player chooses to reroll to hit rolls, he must re-roll them all, sucessful and un-sucessful ones? Save question applies towards rerolling to wound...


Power of the Machine Spirit "... may fire 1 weapon more than normally allowed..."

My questions are: Assuming the LR uses smoke launcher it may still fire 1 weapon? If the LR is shaken/stunned, it may still fire 1 weapon? If it moves 12" it may still fire one weapon?


Thank you for your help.

SkizO wrote:Warptime, Codex: Chaos Space Marines: "...may re-roll all to hit and all to wounds..."

I never though someone would argue on this, but never read the rule in details until then: Does this mean if the player chooses to reroll to hit rolls, he must re-roll them all, sucessful and un-sucessful ones? Save question applies towards rerolling to wound...

Yes. When it says all, it does mean all.

Ghaz wrote:

SkizO wrote:Warptime, Codex: Chaos Space Marines: "...may re-roll all to hit and all to wounds..."

I never though someone would argue on this, but never read the rule in details until then: Does this mean if the player chooses to reroll to hit rolls, he must re-roll them all, sucessful and un-sucessful ones? Save question applies towards rerolling to wound...

Yes. When it says all, it does mean all.

I'm going to stick my neck out and disagree with you on this.

Most rerolls apply to individual rolls, rather than sets of rolls. I would also suggest that 'may' applies to each roll individually. This is implicitly stated on p2 of the rule book - "... - pick up the dice you wish to reroll and roll them again."

If you dont agree then other abilities that allow rerolls, such as twin-linked and 'Doom' (not fortune as it does specify any) also require all the dice to be rerolled, which doesnt seem right.

You're comparing apples and oranges. Check the wording before you claim that just because one rule allows you to choose which dice you reroll all of them do.

Regwon, the rule does state reroll all to hit and and all to wound. The only other way that I would think that it would be permissible to reroll only the ones you want are with the description "re-roll all misses" (such as twin-linked has if I remember correctly) or some other similarly written rules.

And your right. It does state that you may reroll all to hits and to wounds, but you also have the option of not rerolling all of the to hits as well. This comes into play in several of the codicies as well such as the Tyranid. If I remember right, it states something to the effect that a brood may choose the certain biomorphs for its brood. While it states that the brood may take them, the whole brood has to take them for the squad to be played correctly in a game.

Edit: And as far as PotMS comes into play, I'm not familiar with that so I'm just going to leave it for wiser minds to discuss here.

Edit #2: The exact wording for twinlinked is (pg 32 BRB) "A set of twin-linked weapons count as a single weapon of the type, but to represent their fusillad of fire, you may reroll the dice to hit if you miss (including twin-linked blast weapons).

That's correct. You either reroll all of the dice or you reroll none of them. There's no option to only reroll some of the dice.

Actually I find that very interesting and wish I had the codex to see the context of that entry. Because according the the OP, it states that warptime allows the person who has it to "...may re-roll all to hit and all to wounds..."

Now does this mean that if they do one, they have to do the other, or are they independant of each other. I am assuming that they are independant, but who knows. CSM always confuse me anyways... lol

Well if the consensus is that you must re-roll all or nothing then the strictest interpretation of the rules would indicate that if you choose to re-roll you must re-roll both. If you choose to re-roll all rolls to hit then you must also re-roll all rolls to wound.

Would this also suggest that if you chose not to re-roll hits you cannot re-roll wounds because you must do both?

Then this would seem to be a situation where if you choose to use warptime then you roll all the dice to wound, only to have to pick them up and roll them again. In which case why bother including the text about re-rolling to wound as you dont have the choice anyway.

If the text said 'and/or' then you would be able to do one or both, but absolute RaW means you cant.

Thats a good point about that Regwon. Like I said, I'm apt to believe that it was intended as an either/or rule in that you can do one without the other. But you bring up a great point about why its an either/or in terms of "all to-hit and all to-wounds."

But Regwon, RAW says May re-roll, not Must.

But yes, In the rulebook it even says that a re-roll must re-roll ALL the dice.

Cryonicleech wrote:But Regwon, RAW says May re-roll, not Must.

You may choose to re-roll hits AND wounds or not at all.

In the case of re-rolling you roll to hit and if you dislike the result re-roll those dice. Then you roll to wound and regardless of whether you like the results or not you must re-roll them. So in effect you can only chose to re-roll your hits because you if you chose to do that you must re-roll your wounds whatever the result.

You can of course not choose to re-roll at all.

A) Everyone knows you reroll only your misses in this situation.

B) MAY reroll all hits/wounds as opposed to only one like other units. I dont have to roll them all. Someone says you may take all 5 apples, theres nothing from stopping you from only taking 3. Two interpretations, the chaos player gets to choose, so obviously reroll all missed hits and wounds.

Just another case of nitpicking, and if anyone opposed this in a real game theyd get laughed at.

The all just means that every die is optional, instead of only some of them.

You may reroll the 1's? yes
You may reroll the 2's? yes
You may reroll the hits? yes
etc
You may reroll all of them.
Does not mean you have to reroll any of them. Nor does it stop you from only rerolling some of them

Yes, it does prevent you from rerolling some of them. You're trying to change it from 'all' to 'any'.

Ghaz wrote:Yes, it does prevent you from rerolling some of them. You're trying to change it from 'all' to 'any'.

No, you are interpreting it a different (the wrong) way.

You can either look at it like:

You may reroll ALL wounds/hits or none <-- wrong, illogical way.

or

You MAY reroll all of the dice as opposed to only one or two, meaning you may roll up to all of them. <-- correct way.

No, you're also trying to substitute the word 'any' for 'all'. All of the dice doesn't mean just the dice you want.

I have to agree with ghaz on this one. "All" is a big piece of this arguement. It is still useful though, if you get a really bad roll of the dice then you get a second chance.

SkizO is right about the Machine Spirit one. (That's pretty straightforward)

Ghaz wrote:No, you're also trying to substitute the word 'any' for 'all'. All of the dice doesn't mean just the dice you want.

Ive given you the interpretations. All dice MAY be rerolled, as opposed to only 1 die may being rerolled. Not hard to understand. One is wrong (yours), and one is right. Who in their right mind would pay 25 points, the second highest costing CSM spell, for a chance to reroll all hits (and then being forced to reroll all wounds...? So the first roll doesnt matter?). It makes no sense.

These rules are not legal documents. There is going to be interpretation, but you use common sense to come to a conclusion. Obviously RaI follows the argument that you can reroll only misses ("Supernatural precision") as does every other example of rerollings hits and wounds.

Ive never understood why people on these boards bother dissecting the English of the codex like this.Its like people on here argue just to have an argument. When youre at your club and you try to pull this, youre going to get laughed at. If its a tourny, the TO is going to go with the common (aka realistic) view of the rule, and if its a friendly game, they can simply pack their stuff up leaving you looking like a tool.

Trying to argue against basic rules like this that would completely change the rule is useless. Its the same thing with Ghazghkuls 6 inch Waagh!! No one is going to take you seriously, why bother arguing it?

And your 'interpretation' is wrong. All dice may be rerolled means that you are permitted to reroll ALL of the dice, not just any that you choose to reroll. You are trying to substitue the word 'any' for 'all'. Your 'interpretation' requires you to change the word 'all' to 'any'.

As for the rest of your comments, it seems to me that it's being a bit hypocritical on your part. Trying to claim that your view is more 'realistic' is just ludicrous and doesn't change the fact that you don't understand the difference between the words 'all' and 'any'.

I'd have to agree with Ghaz here as well.

It very specifically allows you to reroll all of the dice, not any of the dice.

So you reroll all or none.



Of course, as someone else pointed out, the 'and' in there forces you to reroll both hits and wounds, not choose between them. So if you choose to reroll your hits, you would technically have to reroll your wounds as well. And would only be able to reroll wounds if you had already rerolled the hits.

Of course, a rule that forces you to reroll a given roll is absolutely pointless. If you know before rolling wounds that you're going to have to reroll them (due to having rerolled hits) then there's really no point even making the first roll.

So I'm going to assume that they intended for you to be able to choose to reroll hits and/or wounds, and that's how I would be looking to play it.

Ghaz wrote:And your 'interpretation' is wrong. All dice may be rerolled means that you are permitted to reroll ALL of the dice, not just any that you choose to reroll. You are trying to substitue the word 'any' for 'all'. Your 'interpretation' requires you to change the word 'all' to 'any'.

As for the rest of your comments, it seems to me that it's being a bit hypocritical on your part. Trying to claim that your view is more 'realistic' is just ludicrous and doesn't change the fact that you don't understand the difference between the words 'all' and 'any'.

You keep saying this, yet I have my interpretation right there. You may reroll ALL dice as opposed to only 1.

Its not hypocritical in anyway - your argument makes the power all but useless, doesnt have fluff backing it up, and most importantly - its always played with rerolls on misses. Youre not finding some secret combination that has a loophole with rules (ex. taking 6 landraiders, 3 as dedicated transports). Youre reading the exact same rules everyone else are. You are interpreting it a different way, except in a game that is all subjective and only follows the rules the players do, the majority wins (and luckily the majority are always the most common sense way, and not the teenage internet lawyer way).

This is why I laugh everytime someone tries to argue a basic profile rule in some ridiculous way. Youre not going to change anything, and the only thing youre going to do is lose people to play against, get laughed at, and/or be told otherwise by a TO. If someone tried to pull this on me, I would pack my models up and move down a table and play a real game, all while warning others of what this player is like.

I just have to point this out but it says
"May re-roll all to hit and all to wounds..."
Not:
"All dice may be re-rolled".

I think it is to be used as a fail safe, such as in the case of an EPIC fail. Also, if you re-roll all to hit does not mean you HAVE to re-roll all to wound. (otherwise there would be utterly no point of rolling the first time anyway.)

And again, your interpretation requires the word 'all' to mean the same thing as 'any'. All of the dice means all of the dice, not just any of the dice you choose. Repeating yourself does not change that.

Night Lords wrote:These rules are not legal documents. There is going to be interpretation, but you use common sense to come to a conclusion. Obviously RaI follows the argument that you can reroll only misses ("Supernatural precision") as does every other example of rerollings hits and wounds.

Ive never understood why people on these boards bother dissecting the English of the codex like this.Its like people on here argue just to have an argument. When youre at your club and you try to pull this, youre going to get laughed at. If its a tourny, the TO is going to go with the common (aka realistic) view of the rule, and if its a friendly game, they can simply pack their stuff up leaving you looking like a tool.

Trying to argue against basic rules like this that would completely change the rule is useless. Its the same thing with Ghazghkuls 6 inch Waagh!! No one is going to take you seriously, why bother arguing it?

Yes, this is indeed being hypocritical. It's saying either agree with me or instead I'll throw a fit and try to blame you for disagreeing with me. Go ahead and pack up your models, I don't need to waste my time playing against someone like you or trying to discuss the rules with someone who doesn't understand what this forum is for.

Emperors Faithful wrote:I just have to point this out but it says
"May re-roll all to hit and all to wounds..."
Not:
"All dice may be re-rolled".

I phrased it in that way to show my interpretation of it. Apply it to the rules.

@Ghaz: I was simply pointing out a SLIGHT misqoute of Night Lords part. I must say I am still with Ghaz on this one.

Night Lords wrote:You may reroll ALL dice as opposed to only 1.

Exactly.

ALL.

Not 'any'

Two very different words.


Re-roll all dice means that you reroll all of them.
Re-roll any dice means that you can choose which to reroll.

and most importantly - its always played with rerolls on misses.

By whom?

Anecdotal evidence doesn't actually count for much. The fact that you've only personally seen people playing the one way in no way guarantees that the rest of the world plays that way. As evidenced by the entire store-loads of people who discovered over the course of 4th Edition that they were playing LOS wrong.

*shakes head* this is so pathetic.

Ghaz wrote:And again, your interpretation requires the word 'all' to mean the same thing as 'any'. All of the dice means all of the dice, not just any of the dice you choose. Repeating yourself does not change that.

Seriously, wtf do you not understand? Ex. You may reroll 4 dice - this means you may reroll up to 4 dice, correct? Ok, now lets say you roll 4 dice. That means *gasp*, you may reroll ALL the dice for hits and wounds! Warptime is a power applying to multiple units with a different number of attacks. These different units can reroll ALL of their attacks, instead of 1 or 2. You keep bringing up "any" - Why? It has NOTHING to do with the interpretation.

Ghaz wrote:
Yes, this is indeed being hypocritical. It's saying either agree with me or instead I'll throw a fit and try to blame you for disagreeing with me. Go ahead and pack up your models, I don't need to waste my time playing against someone like you or trying to discuss the rules with someone who doesn't understand what this forum is for.

What this forum is about? Its about making the call. Its about helping people understand rules and how they would be played when translated onto the tabletop. Who said that this was a board for lawyers and that the rulebook was the legal document? Youre free to post whatever you like, but I can post that your rule is BS and never followed that way in the real world, which is what people looking for help are looking for.

And I would be throwing the hissy fit because youre the one objecting to a standard rule and not allowing me to play it that way? Why would I waste my time with you? This is what the internet lawyers dont understand on here - you cant realistically implement these ridiculous rules that no one follows. Just because youve analyzed and cross referenced and come up with your own insane interpretation of the rules means nothing when you depend on OTHER people to play. This is not a video game, the game goes outside the disc and into the people.

Are there any other dexes that word it like the CSM or is it just this one spell?

Night Lords wrote:You may reroll 4 dice - this means you may reroll up to 4 dice, correct?

Er... no.

'You may reroll up to 4 dice' would mean that you can reroll up to 4 dice.
'You may reroll any of the 4 dice' would mean that you can reroll up to 4 dice.

'You may reroll 4 dice' means that you may reroll 4 dice.

Not 3, or 5. Just 4.

These different units can reroll ALL of their attacks, instead of 1 or 2.

Right. They can reroll all of their attacks. Not any of their attacks. Not the same thing.

You keep bringing up "any" - Why? It has NOTHING to do with the interpretation.

He keeps bringing it up because your interpretation relies on 'any' and 'all' being synonymous. They're not.

What this forum is about? Its about making the call. Its about helping people understand rules and how they would be played when translated onto the tabletop.

Not exactly.

YMDC is primarily about discussing what the rules actually say. How you choose to apply those rules is really up to you.

While we'll sometimes make a mention of how we play it, or how we commonly see it played, when discussing the actual rules we stick with the actual rules. The fact that all 12 people in a given gaming club play a given rule a certain way has no bearing whatsoever on how the rules are actually written.

but I can post that your rule is BS and never followed that way in the real world, which is what people looking for help are looking for.

It's really not, because it's based solely on anecdotal evidence. Again, how you've seen the game played is not necessarily representative of how the game is played anywhere other than where you've played. So pointing out that your way is the 'correct' way to play it is not at all helpful.

By all means point out that you play it that way. Just don't assume that everyone else does.

And I would be throwing the hissy fit because youre the one objecting to a standard rule and not allowing me to play it that way?

It takes two people to disagree.

If someone interprets a rule differently to you, sure, you can throw a tantrum, pack up your toys and leave.

Or, you can just accept that sometimes people read rules differently, dice for it, and get on with the game.

This is what the internet lawyers dont understand on here - you cant realistically implement these ridiculous rules that no one follows.

And what you're apparently not understanding here is that some people do follow these rules.

And some just want to know what the rules actually are, before deciding how to play them.

Im not wasting my time quoting all boxes, here are the highlights:

-YDMC is called you make da call. It is not called Rules as Written (and even then, this argument stands). Sorry.
-You may reroll 4 dice does not mean 4 or none. You may eat 4 apples does not mean eat 4 apples or none. You may eat all the apples does not mean all or none.
-I would never roll off for this. This completely changes how effective a unit is in close combat.
-Picking up my guys and leaving because the opponent is going to waste my time arguing over a GAME is throwing a tantrum? I should stay and watch my units attempt to be butchered? Again, my 175 point unit goes from a complete beast to an unreliable one. I should allow that even though thats the reason i brought it?

And even more proof that seals the deal:

Page 2 of the rule book says with rerolls you"pick up the dice you wish to reroll", followed by "If you roll a 2D6 or 3D6, you must pick up and roll all of the dice, not just some of them".

ok, I have changed sides. Night Lords is correct. No one is going to be that pedantic. This is not just one wierd one-off spell, this would have effects across the game. GW should have worded it as "re-roll all misses" but if I were to agree with Ghaz and insaniak, well what would be the point of even making the first roll?

I would say the owner CHOOSES which dice he should re-roll.

Thanks for the LR ruling. I re-read the rules about it and it does seem clear I don't see why this was argued on in the first place actually.

It's funny to see that the internet debate goes on exactly as it did in the tournament. I was leaning more towards the way Night Lords is putting it at the tourny.

I can see how both arguments are valid. How do I reach this John Spencer guy or whatever is name is... I curious of what he makes of this. Specially the part that " if you choose to reroll all hit then you must re-roll all to wounds"

Please keep on arguing, this as yet to stall and defer to name calling.

Emperors Faithful wrote:ok, I have changed sides. Night Lords is correct. No one is going to be that pedantic. This is not just one wierd one-off spell, this would have effects across the game. GW should have worded it as "re-roll all misses" but if I were to agree with Ghaz and insaniak, well what would be the point of even making the first roll?

I would say the owner CHOOSES which dice he should re-roll.

This is just another case of "Which way makes more sense?". Youre paying 25 points for a spell that youre gambling with? Gambling somehow turns into "supernatural precision"? I also have to gamble with a leadership test on top of that, do people really think odds are in the users favour? Why not just buy a shooty spell then if your close combat spell is an unreliable piece of junk? This spell already gets the shaft for Lash instead. I could buy nurgles rot and it would be a ton more effective than warptime then.

Youre going against the rules on page 2 of the rulebook. There is no other rule that forces you to reroll everything (outside of 2d6 and such) that I have ever seen. If you do go the other way, youre forced to reroll wounds, and if you just want to reroll wounds, you have to reroll hits first (and how would you know if you want to reroll wounds until you do it?). So either way, youre making something happen that has little sense behind it.

Night Lords wrote:-You may reroll 4 dice does not mean 4 or none.

But it does. 4 means 4.

You may eat 4 apples does not mean eat 4 apples or none.

Of course it does. Any other examples you want to provide will also mean the same thing.

-Picking up my guys and leaving because the opponent is going to waste my time arguing over a GAME is throwing a tantrum?

Packing up your models rather than actually discussing the issue in a sensible fashion with your opponent and dicing off for it if you can't reach an agreement?

Yup, fits my definition of 'tantrum', sorry.

Playing a game is about both players having fun, not just you. That means actually discussing diagreements and finding a way to resolve them, rather than just storming off in a huff.

Page 2 of the rule book says with rerolls you"pick up the dice you wish to reroll", followed by "If you roll a 2D6 or 3D6, you must pick up and roll all of the dice, not just some of them".

Sorry, but I'm not sure how that seals anything.

The rule in question allows you to reroll a given number of dice. So if you choose to reroll those dice, as per the rule you just quoted, you pick up those dice and reroll them.

Nothing in that rule suggests that you ignore any restriction placed elsewhere on what you're actually rerolling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Emperors Faithful wrote:No one is going to be that pedantic.

Arguing it just for the sake of argument (which is, after all, pretty normal behaviour in YMDC) would have a certain air of pedantry, sure.

But while I can see Night Lord's point in how he wants the rule to work (and quite frankly would have no problems with playing it the way he wants to play it) it's not what the rule says to do, and even the fluff definition doesn't really contradict either interpretation.

Being able to reroll the pile of 1's you just rolled, after all, is granting you a certain increased precision. It's not as effective as he wants it to be, but it's still a bonus you don't normally get on the attack.

This is not just one wierd one-off spell, this would have effects across the game.

Like what?

GW should have worded it as "re-roll all misses" but if I were to agree with Ghaz and insaniak, well what would be the point of even making the first roll?

You need to make the first to hit roll. It's only the first wound roll that is pointles, and that only if you take the view that an ability allowing you to reroll hits and wounds forces you to reroll both, which is debatable.

Im sorry, but Im not quoting your ridiculously formatted posts. You can say that "4 means 4", but no, thats not what it means at all in the real world. Any normal person would realize this, and youre just twisting it for sake of argument. You may have 5 apples doesnt suddenly place a 5 or nothing rule on you, sorry.

Im sorry you think picking up my stuff because my opponent is being a Rules lawyer is throwing a tantrum. If hes going to argue this gak, hes going to argue other garbage too. Thats how it is with these types of players. Im not wasting my time with these losers in a friendly game. The fact is, my Daemon Prince plays a critical role in my army. Not having this spell completely changes the game for me.

There is no restriction set. Im rerolling the ones I want to, like the rulebook says. I can reroll all the dice, meaning I have permission to reroll the "dice I wish to reroll" as pg2 states.

insaniak c'mon! You have to admit that your interperation of the rules is awfully pedantic. RAW is clearly in favour of re-rolling UP TO 4 dice.

I'm going to have to agree with Insaniak et al on this one - reroll all or none is the way the power is played around here (not that that counts for anything), but you have to agree that GW uses a very specific form of wording when they mean 'up to' - usually along the lines of 'you may reroll missed to hit or to wound rolls' and this is set nothing like that, and is very specific so RAI and RAW support Insaniak here, sorry.

hmm, do you think it is possibly a mistake on GW's part to say "all"? Also, are there other cases of similar re-rolls?

Night Lords wrote:Im sorry, but Im not quoting your ridiculously formatted posts. You can say that "4 means 4", but no, thats not what it means at all in the real world. Any normal person would realize this, and youre just twisting it for sake of argument. You may have 5 apples doesnt suddenly place a 5 or nothing rule on you, sorry.

But 4 does mean 4. He's not twisting it. It's what the rule says. 'All' means 'each and every'. Yes the word 'may' indicates a choice, however the choice here is to re-roll the entire group or none of it. In order for the rule to read the way you want it to, the word 'all' has to be removed entirely, OR replaced with 'any'. Is this what was intended? I don't believe so, but it is what is written.

Emperors Faithful wrote:hmm, do you think it is possibly a mistake on GW's part to say "all"? Also, are there other cases of similar re-rolls?

I think it's very likely a mistake.

But that's just an opinion. It doesn't change what the rules actually say.

So for myself, I would be playing that you reroll all or none, but that you can choose to reroll hits and/or wounds... because the second I'm pretty confident was a mistake while the first might not be. Since I'm not positive, I'll go the conservative route.

Obviously, YMMV.

And however you or I choose to play it, RAW will remain that you reroll all your dice or none until they issue an errata on it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Night Lords wrote:Im sorry you think picking up my stuff because my opponent is being a Rules lawyer is throwing a tantrum.

But you're not picking up your stuff because your opponent is being a rules lawyer. You're picking up your stuff because your opponent disagrees with you.

Just because someone plays the game differently to you doesn't make them a rules lawyer.

And frankly, the person claiming that the rules obviously mean something that they don't actually say, simply on the grounds that they themselves are convinced it's the better way to play the game, and getting worked up enough about that to be willing to just pack up and walk away if they don't get their own way is far more likely to be a problem opponent than any of the rules lawyers I've played in the last decade or so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lordhat wrote: Yes the word 'may' indicates a choice, however the choice here is to re-roll the entire group or none of it.

A comparison just occured to me, since I can recall that exact same statement being used last edition.

Rapid Fire weapons had rules stating that if the model stays still, they may fire two shots at up to 12".

People argued until they were blue in the face that 'may fire two shots' meant that they could fire up to 2... right up until GW finally FAQ'd it and pointed out that, no, it was 2 or nothing.

Same situation here. The rules say that you reroll all of them... so you reroll them all. You don't have the option to reroll any less, because no such option is given by the rules.

I'm with Insaniak, here.

NightLords seems to be missing the point.

Yes, I agree that it's probably a mistake on GW's part. Yes, the actual wording makes entire wound rolls pointless.

However, it IS THE RULES, and one of the points of these forums is to figure out what the letter of the rules states, so that we may choose to ignore the rule or not. Since these queries can be quite subtle, it is important that all participants write in a balanced, reasonable way. NightLords is NOT doing this.

I, like Insaniak, would prefer to play that the player with warptime may choose to re-roll ALL his to hit rolls or NONE. And he may then choose to re-roll ALL his to wound rolls or NONE. I think this is still a good psychic power, which is advantageous to use.

You may disagree, but please don't post another shouty, reactionary post reiterating your argument and slamming anyone who disagrees. We get your point.

yeah,
I love how the RAW people admit they think there is a mistake but will push RAW to get a advantage.

anyhow...
I'm playing a game my Daemon Prince is in combat and scores 3 hits and 1 miss

warHammer 40,000 Chaos Space Marines Codex, page 88 - Warp time wrote: ... The Psyker may re-roll all rolls to hit and rolls to wound for the entirety of that players turn

First off by RAW my Daemon Prince has to roll my dice... mine hasn't got moving arms or opposable thumbs... But I assume that RAI GW intended that the Player controlling the Psyker may actualy perform the Re-Roll. I decide I'd like to reroll.

So after the RAW guy has finnished re-reading that bit about the psyker rolling the dice and called a judge over to rule if the player can roll the psykers dice... I look at page 2 of the rule book to see how a re-roll is preformed.

Warhammer 40,000 Rule book, page 2 - Rerolls wrote: This is exactly as it sounds pick up the dice you wish to reroll and roll them again.

I look at ALL my dice that I'm rerolling and I pick up the dice I wish to re-roll, I pick up the failed hit dice, leaving the other 3 on the table.

The RAW guy leaves the game in a tantrum because I blatantly cheated by rolling the dice when the rules as written say the psyker does it...

Panic.

I don't see it as a mistake, but as a way to represent the fickleness of Chaos. You can take an average roll an reroll it hoping for a better result, but you may get burned instead.

So Preferred Enemy works that way too then?

Hrm, missed that.

At least Acid Maw specifies that misses can be rerolled.

shrug

Lordhat wrote:

Night Lords wrote:Im sorry, but Im not quoting your ridiculously formatted posts. You can say that "4 means 4", but no, thats not what it means at all in the real world. Any normal person would realize this, and youre just twisting it for sake of argument. You may have 5 apples doesnt suddenly place a 5 or nothing rule on you, sorry.

But 4 does mean 4. He's not twisting it. It's what the rule says. 'All' means 'each and every'. Yes the word 'may' indicates a choice, however the choice here is to re-roll the entire group or none of it. In order for the rule to read the way you want it to, the word 'all' has to be removed entirely, OR replaced with 'any'. Is this what was intended? I don't believe so, but it is what is written.

4 means 4, but when you put the word "may" before it, it turns into up to 4. Not hard to understand. You may have all my apples doesnt mean all or none. They are giving you the apples and you can choose what to do with them (just like page 2 of the rulebook says...coincidence!). However, if someone used the word MUST, as in you MUST have all my apples, then you do not have a choice.

If people are going to argue "Why didnt they just use 'any'", then Im going to argue "Why didnt they say must, as in 'If you wish to reroll, You must roll ALL dice again'. May =/= Must".

Again, people are arguing just for the sake of arguing like in Panic's RAW player case. Hell, most of the people in this topic agree that it should be (even though it already is) written that way, yet they cling to this flimsy argument. I ask again why? Everyone plays that way, it seems like everyone agrees it should be played that way, and on top of everything, the interpretation of the sentence can easily go the right way as Ive said how many times now.

If you play the wrong way, then you have to reroll all wounds if you reroll all hits, meaning you pick up the dice, roll it, then pick them up again - makes a lot of sense right?

Then if you want to reroll all wounds, you cant unless you rerolled all hits, yet how would you know if you want to reroll all wounds if you havnt even thrown the dice yet? - Makes a lot of sense right?

So interpreting it the right way justifies the cost, follows fluff, follows the rulebook, and actually makes the spell have a purpose...while the other way is shady at best, making the power all but useless (Im going to take a 1/12 perils of the warp test to reroll ALL dice?) and completely makes no sense with being forced to reroll all hits and wounds in the turn. Hmm, I wonder which way the rule goes?

If reading the rules makes a power worthless, that does not mean the rules are wrong.

Paying points for useless things has been an option for ages. It seems to be more common lately, actually.

Off to read more. . .

kirsanth wrote:If reading the rules makes a power worthless, that does not mean the rules are wrong.

Paying points for useless things has been an option for ages. It seems to be more common lately, actually.

Off to read more. . .

I agree, but thats not what Im saying. Im saying there are two ways to interpret it clearly, or else all the people who play with rerolling only misses (which I can comfortably say is the majority of CSM players) wouldnt be doing so.

When theres two different ways to interpret it, you look to what they intended, and clearly with everything else backing up rerolling only misses, there is an obvious way to play the rule.

Except as written there is not two ways to interpret it. "May" does not change the word "all" into "any".

I have always played it as selecting each die individually as well.

This does not mean I am correct though. Thus my intention to read up on it.

I was curious how Preferred Enemy got so strong in 5e - and reading the counter points here makes me question it again.

Until Gwar! pointed out that I was missing a part of the rules for Leaping, I had my Leaping Warriors charging up to 12" through cover - They should only move 1d6".

Ghaz wrote:Except as written there is not two ways to interpret it. "May" does not change the word "all" into "any".

If you choose to ignore basic English, that is outside of anyones control. You may eat all the food on the table means you must eat it all or none of it?

-----------

I can just see it now:

"You may use all $500 000 on this new project the company is building"

"I believe we'll only need $450 000 sir"

"I said you may use ALL $500 000, not some of it!"

-----------

You guys are fighting an uphill battle on this one, with the hill being a mountain.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirsanth wrote:I have always played it as selecting each die individually as well.

This does not mean I am correct though. Thus my intention to read up on it.

I was curious how Preferred Enemy got so strong in 5e - and reading the counter points here makes me question it again.

Until Gwar! pointed out that I was missing a part of the rules for Leaping, I had my Leaping Warriors charging up to 12" through cover - They should only move 1d6".

There are no points countering preferred enemy. Their argument rests on the sole definition of the word all (as a single word mind you, and not in context with the rest of the sentence). PE does not use the word all.

You cant use PotMS to launch smoke launchers. Smoke Launchers are not weapons they can only be used instead of weapons. They have no BS or STR.

Actually the lack of that word is exactly the issue.

There are places that it is clear that misses may be re-rolled (Acid Maw), any die from a set can be chosen and re-rolled (Lictors), or all dice must be re-rolled(Scatter TL weapons).

The fact that it is not stating that some can be rolled, it seems to logically follow that they all should be.

I am trying to see if there is a good place to start on that.

Wait, what?

(Directed at the POTMS thing)

broxus wrote:You cant use PotMS to launch smoke launchers. Smoke Launchers are not weapons they can only be used instead of weapons. They have no BS or STR.

Thanks for that, but I agree with :

Mekboy wrote: Wait, what?

kirsanth wrote:Actually the lack of that word is exactly the issue.

There are places that it is clear that misses may be re-rolled (Acid Maw), any die from a set can be chosen and re-rolled (Lictors), or all dice must be re-rolled(Scatter TL weapons).

The fact that it is not stating that some can be rolled, it seems to logically follow that they all should be.

I am trying to see if there is a good place to start on that.

Except if you read page 2 of the rulebook, itll tell you exactly what you need to know:

Acid Maw- Individual Dice, can pick and choose
Lictors - Individual Dice, can pick and choose
Scatter TL weapons - 2d6 multiple dice, cannot pick and choose, must reroll all.

Following that:

Preferred Enemy - Individual Dice, can pick and choose
Warptime - Individual Dice, can pick and choose

If you -may- reroll all, it implies you also -may- reroll none, obviously. Seems to me like you also -may- reroll some.
Or... You may reroll all, taken individially.

When they have you reroll, they specifiy if you must accept the second result, otherwise you get to pick.
Seems to me like they would also specifiy if you must reroll all of them if you choose to reroll.

If you roll 2d6 or 3d6 you must reroll them all, because it's a single roll.

Rolls to hit and to wound are all individual rolls of 1d6 however, so this doesn't apply.

See, that is why I go and read before posting.

I knew it was in there somewhere.

Panic wrote:yeah,
I love how the RAW people admit they think there is a mistake but will push RAW to get a advantage.

I'm not pushing RAW to get an advantage. I'm just stating what it is. As much as I disagree with Night Lord's opinion of what the rule says, I do agree with him that that is how the rule should be played, and do let my regular chaos opponent do so. YMDC and HIAP (How I actually Play) are often different, especially since I'm no longer part of the tournament scene.

None of this changes what the rule says however.

If you -may- reroll all, it implies you also -may- reroll none, obviously. Seems to me like you also -may- reroll some.

Which once again is not what the rule says. Just because you can choose to reroll all of the dice or none of them doesn't mean that you can choose something in between. If they wanted you to be able to reroll only some of the dice, then they would have used the word "any" instead of "all". The RAW doesn't support only rerolling some of the dice despite some people's claims to the contrary.

Page two in the section detailing re-rolls seems to permit the choice:

"pick up the dice you wish to re-roll and roll them again"

The caveat about rolling all the dice at once is about re-rolling a 2d6 or 3d6 roll.

I am still a bit off on this though.

I read it as you may reroll whatever you want, I do see Ghaz's point, my first impression and the my current impression just don't agree with it.

Broxus, you might want to re-read the PotMS question, I think you misunderstood what I asked...


I think it's worth noting that this whole debate started when the player wanted to re-rolled all hits and keep his misses in order to stay in combat with one SM for another turn to prevent getting shot to bits.

But I believe that whichever ruling is agreed ( if that happens) it will be the same answer regardding hits and misses rerolls.

Thanks to all, this was helpful!

Night Lords wrote:
Acid Maw- Individual Dice, can pick and choose

Because the rule clearly says you may.

Lictors - Individual Dice, can pick and choose

I don't know if you're referring to Feeder Tendrils or Pheromone trail here, but I'll deal with each. FT gives Preferred Enemy(See below). PT specifically say you may re-roll one reserves roll. Because it doesn't specify which one, it means any.

Scatter TL weapons - 2d6 multiple dice, cannot pick and choose, must reroll all.

Here is an underlying problem with your understanding I think. Rolling 2 dice to hit is not equivalent to rolling 2d6, in game terms. The former is two rolls, the second is only one. So in the first instance you are 'activating' 2 random number generators with a range of 1-6, in the second you are 'activating' a single random number generator with a range of 2-12. If Warptime was designed to affect the rolling of multiple scatters at the same time, you would have the option of re-rolling ALL the different sets of 2d6, or NONE of them. Likewise if Preferred Enemy was modified similarly, them you would have the choice of which sets you wanted to re-roll.

Preferred Enemy - Individual Dice, can pick and choose

You may pick and choose because the rule does not specify which rolls, or how many of those rolls.

Warptime - Individual Dice, can pick and choose

Warptime states ALL rolls to hit. Note the absence of terminology like "All failed rolls" (Lightning Claws), or "any rolls" (Fortune, Guide)

Lordhat wrote:
Warptime states ALL rolls to hit. Note the absence of terminology like "All failed rolls" (Lightning Claws), or "any rolls" (Fortune, Guide)

Sorry, other rules in other codexs do not matter at all, and this rule defers from LCs as this uses both hits and wounds, which is probably the reason for the word "all" in the first place. Even if this was seen elsewhere in the same codex, it does not matter when interpreting the rules.

Again, you MAY reroll all dice, just like you MAY use all the money in a budget - does that mean you have to use the entire budget? No.

The way it reads the Lightning Claws _MUST_ re-roll any misses.

Warptime can choose to re-roll all to-hit rolls and can choose to re-roll all to-wound rolls.

Same codex.
Different wordings = different rules.

Night Lords wrote:

Lordhat wrote:
Warptime states ALL rolls to hit. Note the absence of terminology like "All failed rolls" (Lightning Claws), or "any rolls" (Fortune, Guide)

Sorry, other rules in other codexs do not matter at all, and this rule defers from LCs as this uses both hits and wounds, which is probably the reason for the word "all" in the first place. Even if this was seen elsewhere in the same codex, it does not matter when interpreting the rules.

Again, you MAY reroll all dice, just like you MAY use all the money in a budget - does that mean you have to use the entire budget? No.

YOU were the one who started bringing the rules from other codices into the discussion. I simply made the rebuttals.

40k is a permissive rule set. You can only do what the rules specifically permit you to do. The rules specifically allow you to reroll all of the dice, not just any dice that you choose. Your example is meaningless because your budget does not exist within the framework of a permissive rule set. Rerolling all of the dice is the only option given to you when you decide to reroll so that is the only thing you can do.

Panic wrote:yeah,
I love how the RAW people admit they think there is a mistake but will push RAW to get a advantage.

I love how people automatically assume that the people arguing RAW are trying to get some sort of advantage.

We discuss RAW in YMDC. We quite often play the game differently.

I've stated that I would play by the more conservative option because it's more in keeping with how GW have ruled in the past on similarly worded rules. Doing so impacts my own army. There's no advantage in me playing that way. I'm playing that way because I think it's the best way to play it until GW rules otherwise.

RAI: They probably meant to allow the chaos player to pick and choose which rolls to reroll.

RAW: Unfortunately what they wrote is clear, the chaos player has the choice of rerolling all of his rolls or not. The way they used the word all simply does mean that; its reroll them ALL or dont reroll them. To be able to reroll just a few the word any does need to be in there.

The real world example of taking apples, if you take just the good apples and leave the rotten apples for the generous giver to have to clean up then you have violated his offer. You could either leave them all or take them all.
The example with food on a table...its why people say "you may eat all that you want". Saying "you may eat all the food on the table" even sounds wrong when you compare the two statements.


As far as fluff thinking (I know this has zero relevance to raw and only a tiny concern for RAI) its quite possible that the chaos player ability Warptime does just that. If the chaos player doesnt like a round of combat then he can warp time and go back and have an e complete redo of the entire combat. Sounds very much in keeping with the weirdness of chaos actually.



Sliggoth

Ghaz wrote:40k is a permissive rule set. You can only do what the rules specifically permit you to do. The rules specifically allow you to reroll all of the dice, not just any dice that you choose. Your example is meaningless because your budget does not exist within the framework of a permissive rule set. Rerolling all of the dice is the only option given to you when you decide to reroll so that is the only thing you can do.

What are you talking about? The entire reason for rerolling only misses is because its based on the permissive rules on page 2 of the rulebook. I may pick up the dice i wish to reroll when using a reroll rule. Thus, given the nature of the wording for warptime, we determine whether it is going against this permissive rule. Using basic English, and the many examples Ive provided including "You may use all the money in the budget, it doesnt mean I have to use all of it", its clear that it's "up to", and it is not restricting me.

On top of all that, it doesnt matter as even by itself, the nature of the wording "You MAY reroll all dice" is permissive in itself, as it leaves you with options.

I fail to see how English is interpreted in the real world doesnt cross over to rules written by authors to get a message across in the rulebook. The context is no different because its in a warhammer rulebook. You are just picking and choosing what you want to hear for the sake of your argument.

I said it before in this topic and Ill say it again: The rules are not legal documents, they are people communicating to us in modern language. You cannot restrict yourself to word by word basis without taking the context of the entire sentence.

EDIT: Even in this message I quoted you leave out the word "MAY". Its the most crucial part of the sentence. If it wasnt there and said MUST, then you would be right, but that is not the case. MAY changes the whole sentence and meaning.

Night Lords wrote:[What are you talking about? The entire reason for rerolling only misses is because its based on the permissive rules on page 2 of the rulebook. I may pick up the dice i wish to reroll when using a reroll rule.

But you're still bound by the rule that actually allows the reroll in the first place.

If a rule says 'You may reroll these 2 dice' then you get the option to reroll those two dice, or to not reroll those two dice.

So when page 2 tells you to pick up the dice you wish to reroll, you either pick up the 2 dice specified by the reroll rule in question, or you choose not to reroll.

All page 2 is saying is that if you choose to make a reroll, you pick up the dice you are rerolling and roll them. It doesn't over-ride any other rules telling you how to make that reroll. You can't just decide to reroll only 1 if the rule specifies that you reroll both.

Thus, given the nature of the wording for warptime, we determine whether it is going against this permissive rule. Using basic English, and the many examples Ive provided including "You may use all the money in the budget, it doesnt mean I have to use all of it", its clear that it's "up to", and it is not restricting me.

It might be clear to you, but it's not correct English.

'You may use all of the money in the budget' does indeed mean that you may use all of the money in the budget.
'You may use any amount of money in the budget' would allow you to use less than all of it.

'All' means 'all'

On top of all that, it doesnt matter as even by itself, the nature of the wording "You MAY reroll all dice" is permissive in itself, as it leaves you with options.

Indeed it does. Two, to be exact:
1: Make a reroll.
2: Don't make a reroll.

If you choose option 1. then as per page 2, you pick up the dice you wish to reroll (all of them as specified by the rule, as that was the choice you made and so those are the dice you wish to reroll) and roll them.
If you choose option 2, you leave all of the dice on the table.

MAY changes the whole sentence and meaning.

This is the exact same mistake that was made by people arguing the Rapid Fire rule I mentioned before.

'May' doesn't change the meaning of the word 'all'

Yes, it gives you an option. But the option is as specified by the rest of the sentence.

In this particular case, that option is not to roll fewer dice, because the rule specifies that you reroll them all. The option is to reroll in the first place. It then details what you reroll (all of the dice) if you choose that option.

If it said 'must' instead of 'may' then you would have to make a reroll, whether you want to or not.

Insaniak, you have THE most annoying posting format in the world. Ive already painfully responded to two of your posts, and Im letting you know Im not reading your posts anymore until you can put paragraphs together that make it easier to read.

Note: I dont care if you dont care I wont read your posts .

So...what, you would prefer I write a 5-page essay when a single statement would do the same job?

I'm completely at a loss as to how a paragraph is easier to read than a single sentence, but hey, whatever floats your boat. Ignore all you want.

Night Lords wrote:Insaniak, you have THE most annoying posting format in the world. Ive already painfully responded to two of your posts, and Im letting you know Im not reading your posts anymore until you can put paragraphs together that make it easier to read.

Note: I dont care if you dont care I wont read your posts .

Read: I'm going to throw a fit and insult your posting style because I can't admit that I'm wrong.

Yeah,

Ghaz wrote:The rules specifically allow you to reroll...

No. That's not what the codex says in writing. By RAW it says the psyker model rolls the dice, and your psyker model must be able to roll ALL the dice at the same time, so psyker models with small hands that can only roll one dice at a time may not use this rule.

but ignoring that bit of RAW... I'll recontinue your quote...

Ghaz wrote:... The rules specifically allow you to reroll all of the dice, not just any dice that you choose...

I read this as I can apply the re-roll rule (BGB page 2) to ALL the dice... so I do and I only wish to re-roll the misses.

PAnic........

Lordhat wrote:

Night Lords wrote:Insaniak, you have THE most annoying posting format in the world. Ive already painfully responded to two of your posts, and Im letting you know Im not reading your posts anymore until you can put paragraphs together that make it easier to read.

Note: I dont care if you dont care I wont read your posts .

Read: I'm going to throw a fit and insult your posting style because I can't admit that I'm wrong.

This is the most pathetic post Ive ever seen on here (Congratulations). Ive said in my other replies that Im not replying to all that, and Im fed up with his posts that jump all over the place. Seriously, its one sentence and then a gap, and then another sentence, followed by another gap. Stick to well trained thoughts, and make your points in a well written structure. I have absolutely no idea what he said.

Maybe instead of making junky posts like this that have nothing to do with you, you should actually address the issue Ive given you. The wording "You may eat all the apples" in no way implies all or none. Good luck trying to convince anyone that it does, or that this somehow doesnt apply to warhammer (Ive already gotten one ridiculous post trying), so good luck

Sliggoth wrote:RAI: They probably meant to allow the chaos player to pick and choose which rolls to reroll.

RAW: Unfortunately what they wrote is clear, the chaos player has the choice of rerolling all of his rolls or not. The way they used the word all simply does mean that; its reroll them ALL or dont reroll them. To be able to reroll just a few the word any does need to be in there.

Since the others are hopeless, I'm going to explain why the RAW is exactly what was intended and is actually fluffy.

According to the fluff, the Chaos Gods have always been shown as extremely fickle beings. They've been known to take their champions and turn them into spawn. So does it sound very fluffy for you to be able to reroll the dice and the absolute worst that can happen is that the results stay the same? Doesn't sound like Chaos to me in the least. How about you?

It's much fluffier to reroll all of the dice as the rules state. You may improve a slightly below average roll, but the fickle Chaos Gods may also abandon their champion turning the reroll into a disaster. Such is the fate of those who serve Chaos.

Panic wrote:I read this as I can apply the re-roll rule (BGB page 2) to ALL the dice... so I do and I only wish to re-roll the misses.

Codex overrides rulebook, so when the codex says 'all' you reroll 'all', not just the ones that you choose. So you pick up the dice you've decided to reroll, which in this case is either all of them or none at all.

Wow I just realized that because you re-roll 3 dice to hit because you missed with 2 of them, you may then proceed to get all wounds but then lose them all because you have to re-roll them...

Panic wrote:yeah,
I love how the RAW people admit they think there is a mistake but will push RAW to get a advantage.

QFT lol! Spot on Panic!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Look guys, this is YMTC, not just RAW, so unless you're actually going to try and convince your opponent that TECHNICALLY you're right, I'd let them pick and choose. There is no other example that a know of where ALL the to-hits or to-wounds MUST be rolled.

Emperors Faithful wrote:Look guys, this is YMTC, not just RAW, so unless you're actually going to try and convince your opponent that TECHNICALLY you're right, I'd let them pick and choose.

And once again, you appear to be completely missing the point of the forum. Nobody's trying to convince an opponent of anything. What we're doing is discussing the rules of the game, as written in the rulebook.

At the end of such a discussion, you either wind up with a consensus view (This is how the rule works) or multiple viewpoints (where people can't agree on just what the actual wording means).

People reading the thread can then take that result and apply it to their own game as they personally see fit. They're the ones who will be trying to convince their opponents. Or not, if their opponent happens to have read the sam thread and already seen the relevant arguments.


That's why the arguments here tend to stick to RAW... because anything else is just a house rule, and completely irrelevant when trying to determine what the rules actually are as opposed to simply how people choose to play them.

There is no other example that a know of where ALL the to-hits or to-wounds MUST be rolled.

Ignoring for the moment that a short while back you were claiming that this rule would have an impact across the entire game, what difference does that make?

Aside from the Tyranid Lictor, there are no other examples of rules that allow you to Deep Strike into impassable terrain. Does that mean that the Lictor's rules don't actually work as written?

Codexes contain exclusive rules that don't apply to anyone else. That's what the codexes are for.

At this point I would like to point out that the phrase "all rolls to hit and wound for the entirety of that player's turn" also clearly includes the opponent's die rolls, as well as the die rolls for combats not involving the sorcerer. Is that chaotic, or what?

"I'm sorry, but I just don't like how this turn has turned out. I'm going to reroll everything now."

solkan wrote:At this point I would like to point out that the phrase "all rolls to hit and wound for the entirety of that player's turn" also clearly includes the opponent's die rolls, as well as the die rolls for combats not involving the sorcerer. Is that chaotic, or what?

...except that the whole sentence is actually referring to the Psyker's rolls, not every roll made that turn.

Yeah,

Ghaz wrote:Codex overrides rulebook, so when the codex says 'all' you reroll 'all', not just the ones that you choose. So you pick up the dice you've decided to reroll, which in this case is either all of them or none at all.

warHammer 40,000 Chaos Space Marines Codex, page 88 - Warp time wrote: ... The Psyker may re-roll all rolls to hit and rolls to wound for the entirety of that players turn

Ok if Codex over rules page 2 of the BGB, then by RAW I can reroll ALL dice as many times as I want again and again for the entirety of the players turn...
I can keep rerolling untill I have four hits and four wounds...

Panic.

insaniak wrote:

solkan wrote:At this point I would like to point out that the phrase "all rolls to hit and wound for the entirety of that player's turn" also clearly includes the opponent's die rolls, as well as the die rolls for combats not involving the sorcerer. Is that chaotic, or what?

...except that the whole sentence is actually referring to the Psyker's rolls, not every roll made that turn.

You only say that because you haven't seen my combination demon prince and dice tower.

Edit: Because I'm apparently too tired to do the straight man act, or read properly, the rule says that the psyker gets to do the rerolls, not the player, consistency with every other rule not withstanding.

There doesn't seem to be much 'discussion' going on in this thread, insaniak. Just people continuously throwing their own version of 'right' at eachother and accusing others of being wrong, lol.

Anyway, a note on if to-hit and to-wound are mutually exclusive or not; what would be the point of re-rolling both of them because you have to? that would be just like rolling it if there was no re-roll. Doesn't make sense.

I do agree, by RAW, that you have to roll all or none, simply because thats what is written in the codex. Compared to other similar rules, which state you may choose to roll misses, this rule does not follow that same format. Is this right? I'm not sure, it doesn't seem that way. But until GW clears this, then we must take it as RAW, right? Speaking competitively of course.

And I like Ghaz's fluff explanation as well. Well done chap.

So lets stop bashing eachother with the play ground bully-ism "NO YOU'RE WRONG!!" It's getting old. It's leading to personal attacks on posting style and blah blah. We don't need it.

Night Lords wrote:

Lordhat wrote:

Night Lords wrote:Insaniak, you have THE most annoying posting format in the world. Ive already painfully responded to two of your posts, and Im letting you know Im not reading your posts anymore until you can put paragraphs together that make it easier to read.

Note: I dont care if you dont care I wont read your posts .

Read: I'm going to throw a fit and insult your posting style because I can't admit that I'm wrong.

This is the most pathetic post Ive ever seen on here (Congratulations). Ive said in my other replies that Im not replying to all that, and Im fed up with his posts that jump all over the place. Seriously, its one sentence and then a gap, and then another sentence, followed by another gap. Stick to well trained thoughts, and make your points in a well written structure. I have absolutely no idea what he said.

Maybe instead of making junky posts like this that have nothing to do with you, you should actually address the issue Ive given you. The wording "You may eat all the apples" in no way implies all or none. Good luck trying to convince anyone that it does, or that this somehow doesnt apply to warhammer (Ive already gotten one ridiculous post trying), so good luck

Please, NightLords, shut the feth up!

Insaniak's posting style lays out all the points, fairly, and then explains the problems with each of these points. It's a lot easier to read and understand than your single-paragraph rants.

You have made your point. We all know what you think. Yet every other post is by you, blowing up at someone for daring to disagree. We get it. We understand. We get the point, and we disagree with it. Restating it again and again will not change our minds!

yeah,

I'm bored of this too.
It's been proven that by RAW, mandatory re-rolls to wound doesn't work there is no point rolling twice when you have to accept the second roll, so by RAW there is a error in the text.

I'll be playing it RAI.
When GW say ALL it's clear they are refering to both shooting and combat...

When Shooting you may re-roll your dice that missed to hit

When Shooting you may re-roll your dice that missed to wound

When in Combat you may re-roll your dice that missed to hit

When in Combat you may re-roll your dice that missed to wound

PAnic...

ArbitorIan wrote:
Please, NightLords, shut the feth up!

Insaniak's posting style lays out all the points, fairly, and then explains the problems with each of these points. It's a lot easier to read and understand than your single-paragraph rants.

You have made your point. We all know what you think. Yet every other post is by you, blowing up at someone for daring to disagree. We get it. We understand. We get the point, and we disagree with it. Restating it again and again will not change our minds!

What is this? Another tool flaming me when it has nothing to do with you. If people are going to quote me, Im going to respond. Notice I dont have a post recently since no one quoted me?

The problem is they avoid the points or come up with horrible excuses (see: Passive rules post), so I have to go back to the core reasoning behind it. I honestly dont care if they agree or not, they are rule lawyers who have been defeated by the English language and have no way to prove otherwise.

As for inaniaks posts, I have how many people quoting me? If you want me to address your points, dont make me scroll up and down 4 or 5 screens! Keep your points together. My single paragraph rants? What about your entire post that contributed nothing to this topic? GTFO if youre just going to troll!

Even though I've probably ruined my shot, here goes...

The rule for Warptime is "The psyker may reroll all rolls to hit and wound for the entire player turn." The rules for re-rolls says "In some situations the rules allow you a 're-roll' of the dice." One blatantly absurd construction of the rules is that Warptime gives the reroll to the model, and not to the player. Another blatantly absurd construction is that Warptime grants the ability to reroll all of the to hit and wound rolls for both players for the entire turn in which the power is used.

In my opinion, to construe "may reroll all rolls to hit and wound" as something other than "grants the ability to reroll any to hit and wound by the psyker" is equally absurd. But as long as we're arguing absurdities, we may as well be thorough about it. After all, if we're going to argue about Games Workshop deliberately using 'all' instead of 'any', we should be arguing the rest of it, too.

solkan wrote:Edit: Because I'm apparently too tired to do the straight man act, or read properly, the rule says that the psyker gets to do the rerolls, not the player, consistency with every other rule not withstanding.

That's where context kicks in.

Obviously, the model can't reroll its own attacks. Saying that the Psyker can reroll its attacks is simply an easier way of saying that you can reroll attacks made by the Psyker.

Sure, you can go down the silly path and claim that the model itself has to make the roll... but that doesn't really accomplish anything constructive beyond rendering the whole rule completely useless.

YDMC is called you make da call. It is not called Rules as Written (and even then, this argument stands). Sorry.
Although you were clearly stating your viewpoint as RAW until it seemed you were in the minority. Seems a bit silly to maintain your argument is RAW and then say people shouldn't argue RAW.

I would never roll off for this. This completely changes how effective a unit is in close combat.
Then be prepared to have people think you're a bad sport. If it's clearly a rule violation (rolling an armour save and a cover save for the same model, for instance) then no, you shouldn't have to roll-off. If it's a genuine disagreement about a somewhat ambiguous rule, then that's completely fair. Still your choice to leave, of course, but you probably won't make many friends that way.

As far as the any/all discussion goes, well that's mostly just semantics but this is how I see it:

1) You may replace all lasguns with sniper rifles.
2) You may replace any lasguns with sniper rifles.
3) You may replace any and all lasguns with sniper rifles.

Number 1 seems to tell you it's all or nothing. Either the squad has lasguns, or they have sniper rifles.
Number 2 seems to tell you you have the choice. One member can exchange, all members, or no members.
Number 3 seems to say exactly the same thing as 2.

In this example, the word 'any' is much stronger than the word 'all.' Regardless of whether 'all' is present in the sentence or not, it is the word 'any' that specifically gives you permission to pick and choose. It doesn't follow that because in this situation 'any and all' means the same as 'any' that 'any and all' means the same as 'all.'

Sorry if that doesn't make sense, it did in my head, I promise!

DoW



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm clearly way too slow to post on online forums...

DogOfWar wrote:

YDMC is called you make da call. It is not called Rules as Written (and even then, this argument stands). Sorry.
Although you were clearly stating your viewpoint as RAW until it seemed you were in the minority. Seems a bit silly to maintain your argument is RAW and then say people shouldn't argue RAW.

I would never roll off for this. This completely changes how effective a unit is in close combat.
Then be prepared to have people think you're a bad sport. If it's clearly a rule violation (rolling an armour save and a cover save for the same model, for instance) then no, you shouldn't have to roll-off. If it's a genuine disagreement about a somewhat ambiguous rule, then that's completely fair. Still your choice to leave, of course, but you probably won't make many friends that way.

As far as the any/all discussion goes, well that's mostly just semantics but this is how I see it:

1) You may replace all lasguns with sniper rifles.
2) You may replace any lasguns with sniper rifles.
3) You may replace any and all lasguns with sniper rifles.

Number 1 seems to tell you it's all or nothing. Either the squad has lasguns, or they have sniper rifles.
Number 2 seems to tell you you have the choice. One member can exchange, all members, or no members.
Number 3 seems to say exactly the same thing as 2.

In this example, the word 'any' is much stronger than the word 'all.' Regardless of whether 'all' is present in the sentence or not, it is the word 'any' that specifically gives you permission to pick and choose. It doesn't follow that because in this situation 'any and all' means the same as 'any' that 'any and all' means the same as 'all.'

Sorry if that doesn't make sense, it did in my head, I promise!

DoW



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm clearly way too slow to post on online forums...

Hey man, dont put yourself down. Theres nothing wrong with your post.

I agree, it can be seen like that, however when talking about rolling, its in my opinion read that you may reroll "up to" all of the dice, as in the example "you may use all the money in the budget". Basically as in you can choose how much (or many dice) you wish to roll out of what youre given, which is how youd interpret it if your boss said this to you.

The problem with all of your analogies there Night Lords is that the secondary meaning you are attributing the permissive phrasing is not inherent. You are attributing what is mostly social convention into an analogy about semantics and verbiage.

To twist your analogies:
Maybe the apples come in bags of 5 so you have to take all 5 or none at all?
Maybe the budget of 500k needs to be spent for some outside reason, and having 50k left over is actually worse than spending it.

This is why your analogies don't work. You are simply using outside factors to influence the meaning of the analogous phrase - and then using that as a reason for your interpretation.

edit: "The Psyker may re-roll all rolls to hit and rolls to wound for the entirety of that players turn".

Speaking semantics here, the phrase means either:

The Psyker is allowed to choose to re-roll all rolls to hit and rolls to wound...

or

The psyker is allowed to choose to not re-roll all rolls to hit and rolls to wound...

Because of the way its phrased, RAW really does mean exactly that. No getting around it, no analogies will save you from it.

Now comes to part where you decide with your opponent if you actually want to use RAW on this or not.

Dracos wrote:

To twist your analogies:
Maybe the apples come in bags of 5 so you have to take all 5 or none at all?
Maybe the budget of 500k needs to be spent for some outside reason, and having 50k left over is actually worse than spending it.

And if this is the intended meaning, then the word must would come into play. You MUST spend all 500k. You MUST take all 5 apples.

OR, common phrasing would be "you may use all $500k, but if you do, you must spend it all."

Again, I fail to see how it doesnt relate when "you may take 5 apples" in itself grants you the ability to take up to 5 apples in any realistic situation. Should we not apply common sense to the rules? Should we twist the meaning of phrases and break the sentence down into tiny pieces to get an advantage? No.

Night Lords wrote:And if this is the intended meaning, then the word must would come into play. You MUST spend all 500k. You MUST take all 5 apples.

And again, that doesn't work because it removes the option to not take anything.

The rule in question gives you the option (through the use of the word 'may') to make a reroll or to not make a reroll. Replacing 'may' with 'must' would remove the option to not make a reroll. If you cast the power, you would be forced to reroll your attacks.

Using the word 'may' or the word 'must' has no effect whatsoever, though, on just what it is you're rerolling if you do so.

Again, I fail to see how it doesnt relate when "you may take 5 apples" in itself grants you the ability to take up to 5 apples in any realistic situation.

Because, again, it doesn't do any such thing.

In a 'realistic' situation, the person granting you the apples would more likely be saying that you may take up to 5 apples. If they didn't, and simply said that you may take 5 apples, then whether or not you're both well enough versed in English grammar to realise it, they are saying that you take exactly 5 apples.

Should we twist the meaning of phrases and break the sentence down into tiny pieces to get an advantage? No.

Given that you're the one here arguing that the rule means something other than what it actually says because your interpretation makes the rule seem more useful to you personally, I would suggest having a good think about statement.

insaniak wrote:

And again, that doesn't work because it removes the option to not take anything.

That is just one part of the sentence. See: "OR, common phrasing would be "you may use all $500k, but if you do, you must spend it all." which is what I JUST wrote. Or "if you wish to reroll, you must reroll all dice".

Because, again, it doesn't do any such thing.

In a 'realistic' situation, the person granting you the apples would more likely be saying that you may take up to 5 apples. If they didn't, and simply said that you may take 5 apples, then whether or not you're both well enough versed in English grammar to realise it, they are saying that you take exactly 5 apples.

"You may use all the money in the budget" does NOT imply all or none. Sorry you are pressing on this issue, which even others on your side know to be true and are coming up with other silly excuses. You are also implying that if it doesnt say those exact words, there is no way to communicate that message, which is absolutely insane. English has many ways to communicate the same thought, maybe you shouldnt be so narrow minded.

Given that you're the one here arguing that the rule means something other than what it actually says because your interpretation makes the rule seem more useful to you personally, I would suggest having a good think about statement.

And another stupid statement which has nothing to do with what Im doing. Im reading the entire sentence instead of seeing the word "all" and going "ALL MEANS ALL!!". You are picking and choosing

Night Lords wrote:That is just one part of the sentence. See: "OR, common phrasing would be "you may use all $500k, but if you do, you must spend it all." which is what I JUST wrote. Or "if you wish to reroll, you must reroll all dice".

Whether or not either of those are common phrasing doesn't change the meaning of the actual rule as written.

"You may use all the money in the budget" does NOT imply all or none. Sorry you are pressing on this issue, which even others on your side know to be true and are coming up with other silly excuses.

Pardon?

What 'excuses' am I coming up with?

And for what?

You are also implying that if it doesnt say those exact words, there is no way to communicate that message, which is absolutely insane.

It might indeed be. I wouldn't know, since I have no idea what you just said.

English has many ways to communicate the same thought, maybe you shouldnt be so narrow minded.

I'm not being narrow minded. I'm insisting that the word 'all' means 'all'... because it does.

And another stupid statement which has nothing to do with what Im doing.

So you weren't the one who, earlier in the thread, argued that the opposing view couldn't possibly be right because it made your army useless?

Must be confusing you with someone else then. My apologies.

Im reading the entire sentence instead of seeing the word "all" and going "ALL MEANS ALL!!". You are picking and choosing

Picking and choosing what, exactly?

'All' does mean 'all'

Nothing else in the rule changes that.

So, we have two interpretations of the rule.

The first interpretation that people are insisting is RAW despite subjective and vague wording, breaks the rule and conflicts with other RAW.

The other interpretation that also works due to vague wording doesn't break the game. Its also the only way i've ever heard of anybody ever playing it and is the usual answer that i've read on these forums for over a year now with this being the first time option one has been brought up.

I think i'm going to keep playing with the option that doesn't break the rest of the rule system.

Ok, Im sick of the same weak arguements against me being stretched out to 4 or 5 screens. Here it is, please counter this sentence or dont waste time replying to me, thanks!

Hey, congratulations, youve just won the Super Pitch sweepstakes! In doing so, youve won season tickets to the New York Yankees! This means you may go to all the 2009 season games for absolutely no cost!

-----

Hey, congratulations, youve just won the Chaos Glory sweepstakes! In doing so, youve won access to a special psyker power! This means you may reroll all the rolls to hit at no cost!

Orange = MAY
Blue = The ACTION
Red = ALL
Green = The object the action is being performed on

There you go, that's my interpretation of it, and its just as valid as "ALL = ALL". On the tabletop I will argue this, and I will be right and allowed to do so. If you are actually going to argue that you are forced to go to all the Yankee games or none of them, then please save yourself the trouble of posting and go read a book instead. Thanks.

And how exactly does deciding ot reroll all of the dice 'break' the rest of the rule system? Simply put, it doesn't.

From Cambridge University's Site: http://www.cambridge.org/elt/cge/cge/pdfs/Introduction_to_Grammar.pdf

Introduction to Grammar and Spoken English wrote:
There are abandoned or incomplete structures (e.g. It was a bit erm … A bit.).
‘Incomplete’ structures rarely cause any problem of understanding, and can be
collaboratively completed by others. For example, the utterance "For a car"
shows one speaker completing the utterance of another.

Introduction to Grammar and Spoken English wrote:
Ellipsis is common (e.g. [it] All looks great.). Ellipsis occurs when words
usually considered ‘obligatory’ (e.g. a subject for a verb in a declarative clause)
are not needed because they can be understood from the immediate context
or from the knowledge which is shared between speakers. For speakers and
listeners, there are no words ‘missing’, and what we call ellipsis is simply an
economical and sufficient form of communication which is different from the
typical grammar of written English, where greater elaboration and
specification is usually necessary because the written text is usually being read
at a different time and place from when it was created.

Emphasis mine.

So it's clear that when you SAY to somebody "You may take all the apples." that the implication that you may take fewer can be communicated in other ways than actual speech, and that verbal communication is a collaborative effort. Written grammar is by necessity far more precise thatn verbal; there are no cues to the meaning of the text other than what is written on the page, so if you read 'You may take all the apples." that is exactly what is meant... ALL the apples, or none.

Mod:

I can see this is a classic YMDC argument and I am very pleased to see such fine points of grammar being used to elucidate the meaning.

The thread is throwing off Mod alerts so I am going to lock it and first, here is my interpretation.

1. The phrase 'all' means 'all' not 'some of'.
2. GW probably meant to allow the player to reroll only rolls he wanted to, but their grammar let them down.
3. If in any doubt, check GW's FAQ on the matter.
4. If GW haven't FAQed the point, check the Adepticon FAQ list.
5.Failing all else, D6 it.

Try to have a fun game!