Assuming those quotes were meant to be the other way around:

The rule says any dice rolls of a 1. For the mark of the wulfen I roll one die, and I get a 1. Is that or is that not a dice roll of a 1?

Edit for stupid wierd quoting

Double quote fail?

I believe so.

I suppose the other way of looking at it is that the result of a dice roll of 2d6 is at minimum 2 and hence not re-rollable, the result of rolling 1d6 can be 1 and is re-rollable. They are both a singular 'dice roll' one has two dice the other one die.

chezzie wrote:


Assuming those quotes were meant to be the other way around:

The rule says any dice rolls of a 1. For the mark of the wulfen I roll one die, and I get a 1. Is that or is that not a dice roll of a 1?

Edit for stupid wierd quoting

No it would not, as the Dice roll is a 2 in that case (D6 +1)

You have to add the +1 to get the result of the die roll, as you have not rolled a 1, you have rolled a 2.

It is the same with LD tests, you cant ever roll a 1, even if both dice come up ones, the lowest you can get is a two on two D6, just like the lowest you can get on the mark of the wulfen roll is a 2

 DeathReaper wrote:

chezzie wrote:


Assuming those quotes were meant to be the other way around:

The rule says any dice rolls of a 1. For the mark of the wulfen I roll one die, and I get a 1. Is that or is that not a dice roll of a 1?

Edit for stupid wierd quoting

No it would not, as the Dice roll is a 2 in that case (D6 +1)

You have to add the +1 to get the result of the die roll, as you have not rolled a 1, you have rolled a 2.

It is the same with LD tests, you cant ever roll a 1, even if both dice come up ones, the lowest you can get is a two on two D6, just like the lowest you can get on the mark of the wulfen roll is a 2

To get the number of attacks... yes I do need to add the +1. To get the result of the dice roll involved in determining the attacks characteristic I do not, that is simply specified as (1)d6. The result of that roll can be a 1.

A leadership test is a dice roll consisting of 2d6, and I agree not rerollable.

The result of the die roll is the number of attacks, and the die roll. They are identical.

You aren't looking for the result, you are looking for the dice roll

"All models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1."

The result of the roll is 2. The roll is 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The result of the die roll is the number of attacks, and the die roll. They are identical.

No they're not. The attacks characteristic is d6+1. The result of the dice roll is that of the d6.

And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

Sometimes,you may have to modify the number rolled on the
dice(or 'the roll'). This is noted as D6 plus or minus a number,
such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number
given to or from the roll (as appropriate)to get the final result.

All models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.

Note the difference between roll and final result in the Main Rulebook quote.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That's P5 of the Main Rulebook and the SW MotW quote, btw.

 pretre wrote:

Sometimes,you may have to modify the number rolled on the
dice(or 'the roll'). This is noted as D6 plus or minus a number,
such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number
given to or from the roll (as appropriate)to get the final result.

All models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.

Note the difference between roll and final result in the Main Rulebook quote.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That's P5 of the Main Rulebook and the SW MotW quote, btw.

Thank you, I'm at work so couldn't find the right quotes. I believe this solves the argument?

The modified roll is the die roll, as you can not roll a 1 if you are adding 1 to it.

Read the quote, DR.

The number rolled on the dice is the roll.
The number that you get after adding a number to it is the final result.

That's straight off page 5.

I read the quote, that still does not negate that adding 1 to 1 makes 2, and not one.

It is like if you had a plasma gun, and something let you add 1 to the die roll for your BS rolls, that weapon would never get hot, as you could never roll a 1 since you roll a 2-7 in that case. The same applies to the Mark.

There's nothing that adds to your dice roll for BS. That's a bad example. There's things that add to your BS, which doesn't change the fact that you rolled a 1 (unless you have a high enough BS to get a reroll).

 pretre wrote:
There's nothing that adds to your dice roll for BS. That's a bad example. There's things that add to your BS, which doesn't change the fact that you rolled a 1 (unless you have a high enough BS to get a reroll).

It is a hypothetical situation, but it is a perfect example, as adding 1 to 1 gets 2, that's just math.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 pretre wrote:
There's nothing that adds to your dice roll for BS. That's a bad example. There's things that add to your BS, which doesn't change the fact that you rolled a 1 (unless you have a high enough BS to get a reroll).

It is a hypothetical situation, but it is a perfect example, as adding 1 to 1 gets 2, that's just math.

Indeed, but here we have a case where the equation is not 1+1.

The equation is X+1 where X is a value from 1-6. There exists a rule that permits a SW player to reroll when X = 1.

That's what the rules quote states.

The final value (in this instance) is (X+1). The dice roll is X. Rerolling a dice roll of 1 allows you to reroll the X part of the final value iff it is 1.

Right, but hypotheticals are really irrelevant because that hypothetical can't happen. Nothing adds to the rolls for a 'Skill' in the game.

In this example, you are randomly generating a characteristic (something that happens a lot in 40k). You roll and then add a number to get the final characteristic.

The roll is 1, the characteristic (final result) is 2. I don't see how that could be any clearer by page 5.

It even specifies which is the roll vs which is the result in the quote.
" the number rolled on the dice(or 'the roll'). "
"add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate)to get the final result."

That is a clear difference between the roll (i.e. the number on the dice) and the final result.

 DeathReaper wrote:

chezzie wrote:


Assuming those quotes were meant to be the other way around:

The rule says any dice rolls of a 1. For the mark of the wulfen I roll one die, and I get a 1. Is that or is that not a dice roll of a 1?

Edit for stupid wierd quoting

No it would not, as the Dice roll is a 2 in that case (D6 +1)

You have to add the +1 to get the result of the die roll, as you have not rolled a 1, you have rolled a 2.

It is the same with LD tests, you cant ever roll a 1, even if both dice come up ones, the lowest you can get is a two on two D6, just like the lowest you can get on the mark of the wulfen roll is a 2

The dice roll would not be 2.
Page 5 "Modifying Dice Rols"
You have a Dice Roll, a Modifer and a Result.
The Wolf Standard says to reroll Dice Rolls, not the Result of Dice Rolls.

chezzie wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 pretre wrote:
There's nothing that adds to your dice roll for BS. That's a bad example. There's things that add to your BS, which doesn't change the fact that you rolled a 1 (unless you have a high enough BS to get a reroll).

It is a hypothetical situation, but it is a perfect example, as adding 1 to 1 gets 2, that's just math.

Indeed, but here we have a case where the equation is not 1+1.

The equation is X+1 where X is a value from 1-6. There exists a rule that permits a SW player to reroll when X = 1.

That's what the rules quote states.

The final value (in this instance) is (X+1). The dice roll is X. Rerolling a dice roll of 1 allows you to reroll the X part of the final value iff it is 1.

But X is never 1, as the result is X+1

 grendel083 wrote:

The dice roll would not be 2.
Page 5 "Modifying Dice Rols"
You have a Dice Roll, a Modifer and a Result.
The Wolf Standard says to reroll Dice Rolls, not the Result of Dice Rolls.

By your logic you could re-roll a LD test that was two 1's. Which is not true.

 pretre wrote:

Sometimes,you may have to modify the number rolled on the
dice(or 'the roll'). This is noted as D6 plus or minus a number,
such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number
given to or from the roll (as appropriate)to get the final result.

All models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.

Note the difference between roll and final result in the Main Rulebook quote.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That's P5 of the Main Rulebook and the SW MotW quote, btw.

This seems to really support a difference between, "the roll" and, "the result."

So d6+1, is a dice roll (re-rollable if rolled as a 1) that you then add +1 to get the final result (Attacks).

Further on in the rule on page 5 they address when faced with having to roll multiple dice, ie, 2d6, 3d6, etc. Again they make a difference between the dice being rolled and the result,

"Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together, so a 2D6 roll is two dice rolled and added together for a result of 2-12."

Apparently the wording of wolf standards does give a crap about the result, only if the dice roll is a 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:
By your logic you could re-roll a LD test that was two 1's. Which is not true.

Except the rules specifically prohibit this.

"If you re-roll a single 2D6 or 3D6 roll, you must re-roll all of the
dice and not just some of them, unless the rule granting the reroll
specifies otherwise."

Sometimes,you may have to modify the number rolled on the
dice(or 'the roll')

All models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.

You explicitly modify the roll to get the final result.

The result and the roll are different things.

The result depends upon the roll, but the result =/= the roll.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

The dice roll would not be 2.
Page 5 "Modifying Dice Rols"
You have a Dice Roll, a Modifer and a Result.
The Wolf Standard says to reroll Dice Rolls, not the Result of Dice Rolls.

By your logic you could re-roll a LD test that was two 1's. Which is not true.

It's the rulebooks logic, not mine. I'd have worded it differently.
And yes, by that logic you would. But the FAQ says you can't, so you can't.
If it was re-rolling single D6 then logically you wouldn't be able to reroll Leadership (2D6 isn't the same as x2 D6).
FAQ's do change rules...

 pretre wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
By your logic you could re-roll a LD test that was two 1's. Which is not true.

Except the rules specifically prohibit this.

"If you re-roll a single 2D6 or 3D6 roll, you must re-roll all of the
dice and not just some of them, unless the rule granting the reroll
specifies otherwise."

Right you would have to re-roll both dice as they are both 1's, by that flawed logic.

Or Charge distance, etc.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Right you would have to re-roll both dice as they are both 1's, by that flawed logic.

Or Charge distance, etc.

If you re-roll a single 2D6 or 3D6 roll

This makes it clear though that 2d6 or 3d6 are considered one 'roll'. The result of this roll cannot, as I think we all agree, be 1.

And a D6+1 is considered one 'roll'. The result of this roll cannot, as I think we all agree, be 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:
And a D6+1 is considered one 'roll'. The result of this roll cannot, as I think we all agree, be 1.

No, a D6 is a roll. The D6 +1 is the result. Again, page 5. The same page where it says the roll of 2d6 or 3d6 is one roll.

Honestly I'm not sure the charge distance re-roll would hold up anywhere because of the wording of the codex. There would have to be an errata/faq to specify weather this is a re-roll of any D6 of a 1 in order to change it. By them saying any dice (plural) rolled of a 1 is to subjective. Luckily this isn't something that comes up very often.

@WFTWG: No, it doesn't allow 2d6 rolls to be rerolled. See your FAQ

Q: Does a Wolf Standard allow Leadership test results to be re-rolled? (p62)
A: No.

 pretre wrote:
@WFTWG: No, it doesn't allow 2d6 rolls to be rerolled. See your FAQ

Q: Does a Wolf Standard allow Leadership test results to be re-rolled? (p62)
A: No.

That is pretty funny. That FAQ tells you that a Wolf Standard cannot allow a re-roll of a Leadership test. Nothing more and nothing less.

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:

 pretre wrote:
@WFTWG: No, it doesn't allow 2d6 rolls to be rerolled. See your FAQ

Q: Does a Wolf Standard allow Leadership test results to be re-rolled? (p62)
A: No.

That is pretty funny. That FAQ tells you that a Wolf Standard cannot allow a re-roll of a Leadership test. Nothing more and nothing less.

Very funny. Also page 5 tells us that 2D6 is a dice roll. But that can't equal 1 now can it?
And that 1D6+1 is a dice roll and a modifier. So the dice roll can equal 1.

 grendel083 wrote:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:

 pretre wrote:
@WFTWG: No, it doesn't allow 2d6 rolls to be rerolled. See your FAQ

Q: Does a Wolf Standard allow Leadership test results to be re-rolled? (p62)
A: No.

That is pretty funny. That FAQ tells you that a Wolf Standard cannot allow a re-roll of a Leadership test. Nothing more and nothing less.

Very funny. Also page 5 tells us that 2D6 is a dice roll. But that can't equal 1 now can it?
And that 1D6+1 is a dice roll and a modifier. So the dice roll can equal 1.

Actually I already quoted exactly what it means to roll a 2d6 and will share even more here;

"You may also be told to roll a number of dice in one go, which is written as 2D6, 3D6, and so on."

This indicates that despite your attempt to say it is a roll, it is actually a representation rolling a nu,ber of dice at once.

"Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together. So a 2D6 roll is [bold] two dice rolled[/bold] and [bold] added together for a RESULT of 2-12.[/bold]

That is the definition of what a 2D6, 3D6, and so on. Not the little semantic tidbit you keep trying to pull from the re-roll section to classify them.

Nice misdirect when your FAQ "proof" got blown out of the water.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just to add, the wolf standard rule says any dice rolls of 1. It does not say any dice results of 1.

Rolling two 1's for charge distance is two dice rolls of 1. The charge distance aka result is 2, but the dice rolls were 1 and 1.

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
Nice misdirect when your FAQ "proof" got blown out of the water.

Tsk Tsk.. I feel I'm still floating happily in this case.
If you look further down the page..
You can find this little tidbit:

BRB page 5 wrote:"..if you re-roll a single 2D6 or 3D6 roll, you must.."

So the rulebook does indeed consider 2D6 to be a single roll.
So the FAQ proof is sound. The single 2D6 roll cannot be a 1.

chezzie wrote:
To get the number of attacks... yes I do need to add the +1. To get the result of the dice roll involved in determining the attacks characteristic I do not, that is simply specified as (1)d6. The result of that roll can be a 1.

It's specified as 1d6+1. The result of the roll is the number of attacks - they're not different things.
The rule does not say "Roll a d6 and then add one after noting the result." It says your attacks are d6+1.

A leadership test is a dice roll consisting of 2d6, and I agree not rerollable.

And MotW is a dice roll consisting of d6+1.

Sorry about the quote fail - I'll leave it since I didn't catch it in time. Was rushing out the door to lunch.

 grendel083 wrote:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
Nice misdirect when your FAQ "proof" got blown out of the water.

Tsk Tsk.. I feel I'm still floating happily in this case.
If you look further down the page..
You can find this little tidbit:

BRB page 5 wrote:"..if you re-roll a single 2D6 or 3D6 roll, you must.."

So the rulebook does indeed consider 2D6 to be a single roll.
So the FAQ proof is sound. The single 2D6 roll cannot be a 1.

No, I gave you defintion of what a 2d6 or a 3d6 consists of and did so verbatim. What you are doing is trying to jump through a semantical hoop to make your argument. Let me help you understand how this works,

"If you re-roll a single 2d6 or 3d6 foll, you must...' is equivalent to,

"If you re-reroll a singe 2d6 (as defined in the previous section) or a 3d6 (as defined in the previous section), you must..."

As defined, they are not a single roll. As defined they are a roll of the indicated number of dice, which are then added to come up with the result. Trying to continue to point out the "a" of a sentence as the defintion when a lengthy defintion already exists is a wasted effort.

rigeld2 wrote:
And MotW is a dice roll consisting of d6+1.

Looking at the rule again, this is actually right.
The +1 is defined as the modifier, which according to the rule modifies the dice roll itself, not simply adding to the result.
So I'll change my answer in this regard.
2D6 is still a single dice roll though


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
Nice misdirect when your FAQ "proof" got blown out of the water.

Tsk Tsk.. I feel I'm still floating happily in this case.
If you look further down the page..
You can find this little tidbit:

BRB page 5 wrote:"..if you re-roll a single 2D6 or 3D6 roll, you must.."

So the rulebook does indeed consider 2D6 to be a single roll.
So the FAQ proof is sound. The single 2D6 roll cannot be a 1.

No, I gave you defintion of what a 2d6 or a 3d6 consists of and did so verbatim. What you are doing is trying to jump through a semantical hoop to make your argument. Let me help you understand how this works,

"If you re-roll a single 2d6 or 3d6 foll, you must...' is equivalent to,

"If you re-reroll a singe 2d6 (as defined in the previous section) or a 3d6 (as defined in the previous section), you must..."

As defined, they are not a single roll. As defined they are a roll of the indicated number of dice, which are then added to come up with the result. Trying to continue to point out the "a" of a sentence as the defintion when a lengthy defintion already exists is a wasted effort.

You have an incomplete quote.
Regardless, we are discussing re-rolls. I quoted from the rule titled "re-rolls", which according to this (very relevant) rule, considers 2D6 to be a single roll.
And that roll is incapable of being a 1.

 grendel083 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And MotW is a dice roll consisting of d6+1.

Looking at the rule again, this is actually right.
The +1 is defined as the modifier, which according to the rule modifies the dice roll itself, not simply adding to the result.
So I'll change my answer in this regard.
2D6 is still a single dice roll though

How is this right?

Can you quote the appropriate part of the MotW rules?

C:SW page 62 wrote:Furthermore he replaces his actual Attacks characteristic with D6+1, rolled immediately prior to when the model makes his attacks.

rigeld2 wrote:

C:SW page 62 wrote:Furthermore he replaces his actual Attacks characteristic with D6+1, rolled immediately prior to when the model makes his attacks.

I don't read that as saying that it's anything other than a modifier to the dice roll, as per page 5, merely that you roll just before each attacks rather than once?

What am I missing?

How is d6+1 not rolling a dice?
If I roll a 1 and get a result of 2 on d6+1 how is that not a roll of a 1 under the brb?

While 2d6 is clearly not the same, the rule says any roll of a 1. This is different to any d6 rolls of 1, gw are fast and loose with their use of dice, they actually never use die as that isn't the word that is used in the UK to describe a polygon with some numbers on it.

The faq is still only limited to a ld check, sometimes an faq is just limited to that question. Also that is a question that I have never understood, if I roll a 1 in a ld check why would I re-roll?

 liturgies of blood wrote:
How is d6+1 not rolling a dice?
If I roll a 1 and get a result of 2 on d6+1 how is that not a roll of a 1 under the brb?

Because you have not rolled a 1, you have rolled a 2.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
How is d6+1 not rolling a dice?
If I roll a 1 and get a result of 2 on d6+1 how is that not a roll of a 1 under the brb?

Because you have not rolled a 1, you have rolled a 2.

No. You have rolled a 1, the final result (per page 5) is 2.

I roll a d6. Do I get 2-7 on that or 1-6? That is the roll. The +1 is the modifier.

chezzie wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

C:SW page 62 wrote:Furthermore he replaces his actual Attacks characteristic with D6+1, rolled immediately prior to when the model makes his attacks.

I don't read that as saying that it's anything other than a modifier to the dice roll, as per page 5, merely that you roll just before each attacks rather than once?

What am I missing?

Exactly - it's a modifier to the die roll.
Which mean that the die doesn't roll a 1, it rolls a two. You're not rolling a die that generates 1-6 and then adding 1, you're rolling a die that generates 2-7.
You have no permission to consider the die separate from the modifier.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
How is d6+1 not rolling a dice?
If I roll a 1 and get a result of 2 on d6+1 how is that not a roll of a 1 under the brb?

Because you have not rolled a 1, you have rolled a 2.

This thread is awesome. I'm done with the discussion, but watching it continue is certainly amusing. It is very 'Who's on first?'.

= 2

The rule says it modifies the roll itself, not the result. So it would be a 2.

I roll for a d6+1, what did the dice roll when the result is a two?

Yes it says you modify the number on the dice to get the final result. That doesn't mean that the dice didn't roll a one, it means the end result isn't a one. Look at the example or the method it says to employ.

"Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll(as appropriate) to get the final result."

Even in this you roll a dice and modify, so that roll before you modify is a roll that can be a 1. Hence Wolf banner applies.

 pretre wrote:
This thread is awesome. I'm done with the discussion, but watching it continue is certainly amusing. It is very 'Who's on first?'.

= 2

Incorrect, 1+1 =2

 liturgies of blood wrote:
I roll for a d6+1, what did the dice roll when the result is a two?

you rolled a 2, which is the lowest result you can get on a D6+1 roll.

 grendel083 wrote:
The rule says it modifies the roll itself, not the result. So it would be a 2.

No it doesn't.

It follows page 5 of the rulebook:

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll'). This is noted as d6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result.

I've added emphasis, but there is a clear distinction between 'a/the roll' and 'the final result'.

The standard allows you to re-roll any rolls of a 1.

I look at MoTW where it's stated as D6+1. I look at the rule from page 5... it matches the notation given for a modification using that rule. Then we see that the rule makes a distinction between 'the roll' and 'the final result'. Ergo rolling 1 on the die means that 'the roll' is 1 and 'the final result' is 2. I am allowed to re-roll the roll of 1 since that is the result of 'the roll'.

chezzie wrote:
I look at MoTW where it's stated as D6+1. I look at the rule from page 5... it matches the notation given for a modification using that rule. Then we see that the rule makes a distinction between 'the roll' and 'the final result'. Ergo rolling 1 on the die means that 'the roll' is 1 and 'the final result' is 2. I am allowed to re-roll the roll of 1 since that is the result of 'the roll'.

So the result of the roll must include the +1 (per page 5) but the result of the roll is a 1.
That's some interesting logic.

You missed the world Final from your summation and added a bunch of stuff to try to muddy the issue.

So the final result must include the +1 (per page 5) but the roll is a 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

rigeld2 wrote:

chezzie wrote:
I look at MoTW where it's stated as D6+1. I look at the rule from page 5... it matches the notation given for a modification using that rule. Then we see that the rule makes a distinction between 'the roll' and 'the final result'. Ergo rolling 1 on the die means that 'the roll' is 1 and 'the final result' is 2. I am allowed to re-roll the roll of 1 since that is the result of 'the roll'.

So the result of the roll must include the +1 (per page 5) but the result of the roll is a 1.
That's some interesting logic.

The paragraph this is in is headed Modifying Dice Rolls. We are modifying a dice roll - to get the final result. The final result is the result of the roll - after it has been modified. The number that comes up on the d6 when we roll it is the result of the pure roll. This is a component in the overall equation to get the final result of modifying a dice roll, but is not itself the final result. Please demostrate how you can equate two different terms in the rule to one?

Edit: Ninja'd by pretre

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

No, the roll is a 2-7, it is never a 1, ass it is a D6+1 which can never yield a 1.

I would love to see a D2-7. Could you make me one?

 pretre wrote:
I would love to see a D2-7. Could you make me one?

Most people flip a coin for d2, though d6/3 would also work.

DeathReaper wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

No, the roll is a 2-7, it is never a 1, ass it is a D6+1 which can never yield a 1.

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll'). This is noted as d6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result.

Lets take this step by step. We're looking at MoTW which tells us to replace the models usual attack characteristic with d6+1. Let's look at the rule I quoted. Does the way that it's laid out for MoTW match the way that this rule tells us will be noticed? YES - it matches the example exactly.

Good - we need to apply this rule.

Now lets assume the d6 comes up as 1. We look at the rule and see what we do with it. The very first sentence tells us that the number rolled on the dice is considered the roll.

Ok - now we have the Standard whose rules state that we can re-roll any dice rolls of 1.

So we have something, that by the rule I quoted is considered "the roll" and it is 1. Can we therefore use the re-roll given to us by the standard? YES - it is a dice roll and it is 1.

We re-roll the dice and then use that number as 'the roll' for the purposes of the rest of the rule which details how to apply the modifier to get the final result, which is what we use in whatever manner the original situation requires, in this case replacing the models usual attacks characteristic.

Please demonstrate the flaw in what I've posted above, it is a set of logical steps that follows the wording of the rule.

 Happyjew wrote:

 pretre wrote:
I would love to see a D2-7. Could you make me one?

Most people flip a coin for d2, though d6/3 would also work.

No, not a D2. I want a D7 that only has numbers from 2 to 7 on it.

chezzie wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

chezzie wrote:
I look at MoTW where it's stated as D6+1. I look at the rule from page 5... it matches the notation given for a modification using that rule. Then we see that the rule makes a distinction between 'the roll' and 'the final result'. Ergo rolling 1 on the die means that 'the roll' is 1 and 'the final result' is 2. I am allowed to re-roll the roll of 1 since that is the result of 'the roll'.

So the result of the roll must include the +1 (per page 5) but the result of the roll is a 1.
That's some interesting logic.

The paragraph this is in is headed Modifying Dice Rolls. We are modifying a dice roll - to get the final result. The final result is the result of the roll - after it has been modified. The number that comes up on the d6 when we roll it is the result of the pure roll. This is a component in the overall equation to get the final result of modifying a dice roll, but is not itself the final result. Please demostrate how you can equate two different terms in the rule to one?

Edit: Ninja'd by pretre

We know that, per page 5, a modified dice roll is still a roll. The Banner says that you can re-roll a dice roll of a 1.
Rolling a 1 on the die is not a dice roll - you have to modify it. You don't have permission to jump in the middle and check what you rolled before applying the modifier.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 pretre wrote:
I would love to see a D2-7. Could you make me one?

Most people flip a coin for d2, though d6/3 would also work.

No, not a D2. I want a D7 that only has numbers from 2 to 7 on it.

That's easy - gimme a marker and a d6.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

No, the roll is a 2-7, it is never a 1, ass it is a D6+1 which can never yield a 1.

The rules on page 5 do not agree with you. The modifier creates the final result but the wolf standard doesn't deal with final results it deals with rolls.

chezzie wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

No, the roll is a 2-7, it is never a 1, ass it is a D6+1 which can never yield a 1.

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll'). This is noted as d6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result.

Lets take this step by step. We're looking at MoTW which tells us to replace the models usual attack characteristic with d6+1. Let's look at the rule I quoted. Does the way that it's laid out for MoTW match the way that this rule tells us will be noticed? YES - it matches the example exactly.

Good - we need to apply this rule.

Now lets assume the d6 comes up as 1. We look at the rule and see what we do with it. The very first sentence tells us that the number rolled on the dice is considered the roll.

Ok - now we have the Standard whose rules state that we can re-roll any dice rolls of 1.

So we have something, that by the rule I quoted is considered "the roll" and it is 1. Can we therefore use the re-roll given to us by the standard? YES - it is a dice roll and it is 1.

We re-roll the dice and then use that number as 'the roll' for the purposes of the rest of the rule which details how to apply the modifier to get the final result, which is what we use in whatever manner the original situation requires, in this case replacing the models usual attacks characteristic.

Please demonstrate the flaw in what I've posted above, it is a set of logical steps that follows the wording of the rule.

You do realize you've just asserted that the number realized after adding the modifier is not a dice roll, right?

rigeld2 wrote:

We know that, per page 5, a modified dice roll is still a roll. The Banner says that you can re-roll a dice roll of a 1.
Rolling a 1 on the die is not a dice roll - you have to modify it. You don't have permission to jump in the middle and check what you rolled before applying the modifier.

No. Modifying the dice roll gives us a result. Where does it state that it is still a roll? It is a modification of a roll, yielding a result. Please respond to the post where I laid out the steps.

The number you get after adding the modifier is not the dice roll it is the modified dice roll as per the rules.

chezzie wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

No, the roll is a 2-7, it is never a 1, ass it is a D6+1 which can never yield a 1.

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll'). This is noted as d6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result.

Lets take this step by step. We're looking at MoTW which tells us to replace the models usual attack characteristic with d6+1. Let's look at the rule I quoted. Does the way that it's laid out for MoTW match the way that this rule tells us will be noticed? YES - it matches the example exactly.

Good - we need to apply this rule.

Now lets assume the d6 comes up as 1. We look at the rule and see what we do with it. The very first sentence tells us that the number rolled on the dice is considered the roll.

Ok - now we have the Standard whose rules state that we can re-roll any dice rolls of 1.

So we have something, that by the rule I quoted is considered "the roll" and it is 1. Can we therefore use the re-roll given to us by the standard? YES - it is a dice roll and it is 1.

We re-roll the dice and then use that number as 'the roll' for the purposes of the rest of the rule which details how to apply the modifier to get the final result, which is what we use in whatever manner the original situation requires, in this case replacing the models usual attacks characteristic.

Please demonstrate the flaw in what I've posted above, it is a set of logical steps that follows the wording of the rule.

A great breakdown of the rules.

DR, instead of just repeating an unfounded statement over and over, how about breaking your process down as above using the RAW?

rigeld2 wrote:

You do realize you've just asserted that the number realized after adding the modifier is not a dice roll, right?

Yes, because it isn't a dice roll at that point. It is the result of taking a dice roll and modifying it. This seems to be the part that you're missing. At no point does it mention that it is still a dice roll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:

A great breakdown of the rules.

DR, instead of just repeating an unfounded statement over and over, how about breaking your process down as above using the RAW?

Thank you. If there is a flaw in the logic I would love to see it, but I can't see where I'm breaking the rules to get to my conclusion.

chezzie wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

You do realize you've just asserted that the number realized after adding the modifier is not a dice roll, right?

Yes, because it isn't a dice roll at that point. It is the result of taking a dice roll and modifying it. This seems to be the part that you're missing. At no point does it mention that it is still a dice roll.

... Which means it's useless. We aren't asked to look at a result of a dice roll, we're asked to look at a dice roll.
The (d6+1) is a dice roll.

MotW doesn't ask you to look for a dice roll.

"Furthermore he replaces his actual Attacks characteristic with D6+1, rolled immediately prior to when the model makes his attacks."

It asks you to replace it with the result of D6 (the roll) +1 (the modifier). Nowhere in the MotW does it define D6+1 as 'the roll'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Either way, we're way in the weeds at this point.

rigeld2 wrote:

chezzie wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

You do realize you've just asserted that the number realized after adding the modifier is not a dice roll, right?

Yes, because it isn't a dice roll at that point. It is the result of taking a dice roll and modifying it. This seems to be the part that you're missing. At no point does it mention that it is still a dice roll.

... Which means it's useless. We aren't asked to look at a result of a dice roll, we're asked to look at a dice roll.
The (d6+1) is a dice roll.

No, please read the rule I have posted. the d6 is the dice roll. By adding +1 to it we get to the final result which is what we need.

I'm struggling to see how else to explain this.

If I roll a D6 what possible rolls does that give us?

I hope you agree that it gives us 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Now go through the steps I posted by deconstructing the rule on p5 and see how it works.

Are you saying that if I DID have a die with numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 on then I WOULDN'T be allowed, but if I rolled a normal die then added 1 I would? This is a great example of a terribly written rule. I would be of the train of thought that it is the FINAL result that constitutes the roll rather than the initial, pre-modifier roll as otherwise you hit problems like I just said.

Though if we're being as strict RAW as we are for other rules, it only works when you have multiple rolls of 1, due to the use of "dice" not "die" - dice is strictly plural.

I don't think we're going to reach a de facto agreement and RAW is way too unclear. Best to ask your opponent before a game. Yes, that really is the best I can do here.

Eyjio wrote:
Are you saying that if I DID have a die with numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 on then I WOULDN'T be allowed, but if I rolled a normal die then added 1 I would? This is a great example of a terribly written rule. I would be of the train of thought that it is the FINAL result that constitutes the roll rather than the initial, pre-modifier roll as otherwise you hit problems like I just said.

Though if we're being as strict RAW as we are for other rules, it only works when you have multiple rolls of 1, due to the use of "dice" not "die" - dice is strictly plural.

I don't think we're going to reach a de facto agreement and RAW is way too unclear. Best to ask your opponent before a game. Yes, that really is the best I can do here.

Sadly this dice/die distinction fails since the rule specifies dice when referring to an example of one D6.

OK, just so I'm sure, we are (mostly) in agreement that you cannot re-roll 2D6, 3D6, etc. Now we are arguing if a modified roll can be affected?

I actually have to agree with chezzie that you can re-roll the D6 based on the Autarch, specifically Master Strategist: you may choose to add 1 to your reserve rolls (a roll of 1 always counts as a failure). The rule allows you to roll D6+1 for reserves. if we follow the logic that only the final result matters, you would never roll a 1. Of course with reserve rolls being slightly different in 6th ed, rolling a 1 and adding 1 still fails but that is beside the point.

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
A great breakdown of the rules.

DR, instead of just repeating an unfounded statement over and over, how about breaking your process down as above using the RAW?

"Sometimes, you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice (or the roll)" P.5

Do you need to modify the roll? (Yes).

What is the roll of a D6+1, assuming a 1 on the die? (2)

Does the Wolf standard allow you to re-roll 2's? (No).

 Happyjew wrote:
OK, just so I'm sure, we are (mostly) in agreement that you cannot re-roll 2D6, 3D6, etc. Now we are arguing if a modified roll can be affected?

I actually have to agree with chezzie that you can re-roll the D6 based on the Autarch, specifically Master Strategist: you may choose to add 1 to your reserve rolls (a roll of 1 always counts as a failure). The rule allows you to roll D6+1 for reserves. if we follow the logic that only the final result matters, you would never roll a 1. Of course with reserve rolls being slightly different in 6th ed, rolling a 1 and adding 1 still fails but that is beside the point.

Yes I certainly agree that the wolf standard doesn't let you re roll a 2d6 or 3d6 roll.

From later in the paragraph I quoted earlier

You may also be told to roll a number of dice in one go, which is written as 2D6, 3D6 and so on. Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together, so a 2d6 roll is two dice added together for a result of 2-12.

Here we see what GW define as a 2d6 roll and that is a number between 2-12. This means we cannot use the re-roll since a result of 1 from a 2d6 roll is impossible.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
A great breakdown of the rules.

DR, instead of just repeating an unfounded statement over and over, how about breaking your process down as above using the RAW?

"Sometimes, you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice (or the roll)" P.5

Do you need to modify the roll? (Yes).

What is the roll of a D6+1, assuming a 1 on the die? (2)

Does the Wolf standard allow you to re-roll 2's? (No).

Can you give a reasonable explanation on the Autarch example I gave, as to why they would include that a roll of 1 is always a failure (i'm ccertain it is not redundancy).

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
A great breakdown of the rules.

DR, instead of just repeating an unfounded statement over and over, how about breaking your process down as above using the RAW?

"Sometimes, you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice (or the roll)" P.5

Do you need to modify the roll? (Yes).

What is the roll of a D6+1, assuming a 1 on the die? (2)

Does the Wolf standard allow you to re-roll 2's? (No).

The issue is is that the roll is simply defined as the number rolled on the dice. The result of modifying that roll - the final result per the rule - is d6+1. The only point where the roll is defined in this rule ( with regards to 1 dice) is the number rolled on the dice, the D6 + 1 is the final result... not the dice roll

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll').

It's right there. The roll is modified. Not the result.
So D6+1 is a roll. It's a modified roll certainly, but still the roll.

So look at it this way, sometimes you have to modify X.
If X is a 1 then your redo X.
For this models attacks you roll X+1.

That is how I read it. The +1 is the modifier but it is not the dice roll as the rules tell you to Roll the dice, apply the modifier and then get the result. Not that it is the roll.

 grendel083 wrote:

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll').

It's right there. The roll is modified. Not the result.
So D6+1 is a roll. It's a modified roll certainly, but still the roll.

This is simpler than the explanation I was going to post, so I will 100% agree with this post instead of posting my, rather long winded, explanation in favor of this simpler, yet accurate, explanation.

So then an Eldar army with 2 Autarchs will always be able to get any unit in Reserves in on Turn 2. Good to know.

Do Autarchs stack? I know Lictors don't with themselves and neither do Hive Commanders.

You guys have latched onto one sentence in that paragraph, read the process of modification.
The +1 is the modifier the d6 is the roll. That is all it is.

rigeld2 wrote:
Do Autarchs stack? I know Lictors don't with themselves and neither do Hive Commanders.

Q. If an army has two Autarchs, does it get +2 to its Reserve rolls?
(p29)
A. The player may choose each turn whether to add +1, +2 or
no bonus to his reserve rolls.

Sweet. Auto reserves it is. ( stupid GW hating on Nids )

rigeld2 wrote:
Sweet. Auto reserves it is. ( stupid GW hating on Nids )

However a roll of 1 (on D6+2 with double Autarchs) is an auto-fail.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

No, the roll is a 2-7, it is never a 1, ass it is a D6+1 which can never yield a 1.

If you want to house rule it, sure.

But using RAW, the die is a 1, so you can reroll it per the Wolf Standard.

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

No, the roll is a 2-7, it is never a 1, ass it is a D6+1 which can never yield a 1.

If you want to house rule it, sure.

But using RAW, the die is a 1, so you can reroll it per the Wolf Standard.

Not what RAW says.
The roll is a D6+1, it doesn't say re-roll unmodified rolls of 1. Or Rolls before modification.
The rule says it's the dice roll that is modified, not the result of a dice roll.

 grendel083 wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the dice roll for mark of the wulfen is a 2-7, it is never 1

No, the dice roll is a 1. My dice are numbered 1-6, not 2-7. It specifically says result of the dice roll, not final result.

I'd let the Space Wolf player reroll his number of attacks because that's what the rules support.

No, the roll is a 2-7, it is never a 1, ass it is a D6+1 which can never yield a 1.

If you want to house rule it, sure.

But using RAW, the die is a 1, so you can reroll it per the Wolf Standard.

Not what RAW says.
The roll is a D6+1, it doesn't say re-roll unmodified rolls of 1. Or Rolls before modification.
The rule says it's the dice roll that is modified, not the result of a dice roll.

The rule book says the dice roll is modified but at no point does it call the modified outcome a roll, it calls it the final result.

The rules say to re-roll "any dice roll of a 1"

The roll of a 2 is not the roll of a 1, since the dice roll is modified it is no longer a 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The rules say to re-roll "any dice roll of a 1"

The roll of a 2 is not the roll of a 1, since the dice roll is modified it is no longer a 1.

When do you add the modifier?

You roll it, it's a 1. No matter what you try and say, that die is a 1. You add 1 to it and the result is 2, but that die is 1.

We are not told any unmodified rolls of a 1 are re-rolled, so you must add in the modifier to comply with the rules.

Permissive ruleset wins here.

 DeathReaper wrote:
We are not told any unmodified rolls of a 1 are re-rolled, so you must add in the modifier to comply with the rules.

Permissive ruleset wins here.

You are not told in the rules that a d6+2 is a roll. Permissive ruleset for the win.
The rules say make a roll then add the modifiers to get a total not a roll.
The wolf standard says roll of a one not total of a 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:
We are not told any unmodified rolls of a 1 are re-rolled, so you must add in the modifier to comply with the rules.

Permissive ruleset wins here.

Roll a die(D6), what is it it's a 1-6.

The total is the die roll. you roll the die to figure out how many attacks for the guy with the Mark.

You roll a 2, then you can not re-roll because that is not a 1.

You are not permitted to count just the number on the die, as the roll has a modifier.

Permissive ruleset tells us this is true.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The total is the die roll. you roll the die to figure out how many attacks for the guy with the Mark.

You roll a 2, then you can not re-roll because that is not a 1.

You are not permitted to count just the number on the die, as the roll has a modifier.

Permissive ruleset tells us this is true.

The roll of a die would not add in a modifier. The result is modified, not the roll.
The rules say make a roll then add the modifiers to get a total not a roll.
The wolf standard says roll of a one not total of a 1.

Otherwise with your logic a roll of 1 would always wound because its 1+(str) so it would never be a roll of 1

 DeathReaper wrote:


You are not permitted to count just the number on the die, as the roll has a modifier.

Permissive ruleset tells us this is true.

Where? Cos if you can't count the number how do you apply the modifier? Schrodinger's dice?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

The total is the die roll.

This is actually just wrong.

 grendel083 wrote:

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll').

It's right there. The roll is modified. Not the result.
So D6+1 is a roll. It's a modified roll certainly, but still the roll.

No its the exact opposite.

"Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled...." Number.
You modify the number rolled, not the roll.


So you roll a one and get number one. Then you modify the number one to number two, but the roll is still one.

Indeed.

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll'). This is noted as d6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result.

The number rolled on the dice is the roll. We are told in the third sentence that the number rolled on the dice is still considered the roll. When it is adjusted by the modifier it is the final result.

Sadly I'm at work now, so have no rulebook here, but the part about re-rolling dice (the next paragraph on p5 for those who can give us the exact quote) tells us that whatever modifiers apply to the original dice roll apply to the reroll.

 DeathReaper wrote:
We are not told any unmodified rolls of a 1 are re-rolled, so you must add in the modifier to comply with the rules.

Permissive ruleset wins here.

And the book says to reroll a dice roll of a 1. So, you'll have to show me where it says you can't or your house ruling it.

Thanks guys for the feedback. So the answer to the original question is "no, I can not use the wolf standard to modify my charge distance if I roll a 1 on the dice because ALL 2D6 rolls are thrown together and the result can never be a 1.

A new question has emerged regarding the wolf standard and mark of the wolfen that someone else brought up. After reading the rules in the codex, FAQ, and MRB, I will be rerolling ANY dice roll of a one when I roll for my attacks for mark of the wolfen (I have rolled ones before) if I used my banner. The reason is because there is a distinct difference between the roll and final result when adding modifiers per raw.

Thank you again for the feedback.

Polecat wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll').

It's right there. The roll is modified. Not the result.
So D6+1 is a roll. It's a modified roll certainly, but still the roll.

No its the exact opposite.

"Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled...." Number.
You modify the number rolled, not the roll.

So you roll a one and get number one. Then you modify the number one to number two, but the roll is still one.

The number rolled IS the roll, says right there in the bracketed part of the rule.
The modifier is applied to the roll itself. You roll a one, its modified to two. You now have a roll of two. NOT a result of two, but a roll of two.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
The roll of a die would not add in a modifier. The result is modified, not the roll.
The rules say make a roll then add the modifiers to get a total not a roll.

The result is NOT what is modified, the roll is. It's right there in the quoted rule "modify the number rolled" (aka "the role"). Result isn't mentioned. Not once.

 grendel083 wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
The roll of a die would not add in a modifier. The result is modified, not the roll.
The rules say make a roll then add the modifiers to get a total not a roll.

The result is NOT what is modified, the roll is. It's right there in the quoted rule "modify the number rolled" (aka "the role"). Result isn't mentioned. Not once.

Oh good than. Than when I roll a 1 to wound it's not really a 1 so it will wound.

Roll to wound D6+Str

Kal-El wrote:
Thanks guys for the feedback. So the answer to the original question is "no, I can not use the wolf standard to modify my charge distance if I roll a 1 on the dice because ALL 2D6 rolls are thrown together and the result can never be a 1.

A new question has emerged regarding the wolf standard and mark of the wolfen that someone else brought up. After reading the rules in the codex, FAQ, and MRB, I will be rerolling ANY dice roll of a one when I roll for my attacks for mark of the wolfen (I have rolled ones before) if I used my banner. The reason is because there is a distinct difference between the roll and final result when adding modifiers per raw.

Thank you again for the feedback.

Yes, I believe you're correct on both points - and apologies for the explosion of posts in the thread.

 grendel083 wrote:

Polecat wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll').

It's right there. The roll is modified. Not the result.
So D6+1 is a roll. It's a modified roll certainly, but still the roll.

No its the exact opposite.

"Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled...." Number.
You modify the number rolled, not the roll.

So you roll a one and get number one. Then you modify the number one to number two, but the roll is still one.

The number rolled IS the roll, says right there in the bracketed part of the rule.
The modifier is applied to the roll itself. You roll a one, its modified to two. You now have a roll of two. NOT a result of two, but a roll of two.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
The roll of a die would not add in a modifier. The result is modified, not the roll.
The rules say make a roll then add the modifiers to get a total not a roll.

The result is NOT what is modified, the roll is. It's right there in the quoted rule "modify the number rolled" (aka "the role"). Result isn't mentioned. Not once.

The roll is modified but the result is 2, not the roll. Look at the words the brb uses carefully. Look at the whole of the paragraph, you and DR seem to think that the only line that matters in a paragraph is the first one. The number rolled is the roll, that is then modified to give a result.
The roll or making a roll is the physical action you take. The rules differentiate between that and the result of a modified roll.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
The roll is modified but the result is 2, not the roll. Look at the words the brb uses carefully. Look at the whole of the paragraph, you and DR seem to think that the only line that matters in a paragraph is the first one. The number rolled is the roll, that is then modified to give a result.
The roll or making a roll is the physical action you take. The rules differentiate between that and the result of a modified roll.

Totally wrong, I'm sorry but it's right there in black and white.
You even say it right there, the roll is modified.
You now have a modified roll.
The result doesn't come into it, the whole idea that there must be a "result" (something that is NOT in the rule) is the problem many people are clearly having. Talking about a need for a result, is the part being made up, and is not in the rule at all.
There is no result.
There is a roll.
This is then modified.
The number of attacks is your modified roll, and you move on to rolling to hit.
The number of attacks is never the RESULT of a modified roll, that is a made up concept.

 grendel083 wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
The roll is modified but the result is 2, not the roll. Look at the words the brb uses carefully. Look at the whole of the paragraph, you and DR seem to think that the only line that matters in a paragraph is the first one. The number rolled is the roll, that is then modified to give a result.
The roll or making a roll is the physical action you take. The rules differentiate between that and the result of a modified roll.

Totally wrong, I'm sorry but it's right there in black and white.
You even say it right there, the roll is modified.
You now have a modified roll.
The result doesn't come into it, the whole idea that there must be a "result" (something that is NOT in the rule) is the problem many people are clearly having. Talking about a need for a result, is the part being made up, and is not in the rule at all.
There is no result.
There is a roll.
This is then modified.
The number of attacks is your modified roll, and you move on to rolling to hit.
The number of attacks is never the RESULT of a modified roll, that is a made up concept.

Sometimes you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice ( or 'the roll'). This is noted as d6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result.

That's the exact wording of the rule in question. Note the existence of the final three words "the final result". The final result exists in the rule. Please clarify how the "result" is not in the rule when it's there in black and white.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also note that it states "to get the final result" not "to get the modified roll"

Fair enough, I stand corrected. I do apologise.
In any event, whether the modified roll or the result of a modified roll is used, makes not difference.
The Wolf Standard does not call for Unmodified Rolls (as things like Characteristic Test do).

I'm sorry if my post came across a tad agressive :|

I'm at work so can't look the wording of the characteristic tests up. Could you post it so I can see what you're saying is the difference between it and the Wolf Standard one?

 grendel083 wrote:
Fair enough, I stand corrected. I do apologise.
In any event, whether the modified roll or the result of a modified roll is used, makes not difference.
The Wolf Standard does not call for Unmodified Rolls (as things like Characteristic Test do).

No worries, I'm not touchy about these things.
Since the result and the roll are seen to be different in the rulebook do you at least see where we are coming from?

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
Fair enough, I stand corrected. I do apologise.
In any event, whether the modified roll or the result of a modified roll is used, makes not difference.
The Wolf Standard does not call for Unmodified Rolls (as things like Characteristic Test do).

No worries, I'm not touchy about these things.
Since the result and the roll are seen to be different in the rulebook do you at least see where we are coming from?

Yes, totally see where you're coming from.
But the way I'm seeing it, is the rule says the roll itself is modified, and the Wolf Standard asks for neither an unmodified roll, nor the result of a roll. I can see no reason why a modifier shouldn't be applied, and there are examples of rules what actuall call for unmodified rolls.

 grendel083 wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
Fair enough, I stand corrected. I do apologise.
In any event, whether the modified roll or the result of a modified roll is used, makes not difference.
The Wolf Standard does not call for Unmodified Rolls (as things like Characteristic Test do).

No worries, I'm not touchy about these things.
Since the result and the roll are seen to be different in the rulebook do you at least see where we are coming from?

Yes, totally see where you're coming from.
But the way I'm seeing it, is the rule says the roll itself is modified, and the Wolf Standard asks for neither an unmodified roll, nor the result of a roll. I can see no reason why a modifier shouldn't be applied, and there are examples of rules what actuall call for unmodified rolls.

I'm not trying to be awkward, just have no means to get to a rulebook atm, could you post an example of one of those rules so I can see how it differs from the wolf standard one?

"...a dice roll of 6 is always a failure, and a dice roll of 1 is always a success, regardless of any other modifiers..."
From Characteristic Tests.

 grendel083 wrote:
"...a dice roll of 6 is always a failure, and a dice roll of 1 is always a success, regardless of any other modifiers..."
From Characteristic Tests.

Thank you, but doesn't that support the idea that the roll and the result are two different things?

I'm not quite seeing your logic here, apologies if I'm being slow?

It's asking for a roll that hasn't been modified, ie an unmodified roll.
The Wolf Standard doesn't ask for this.

 grendel083 wrote:
It's asking for a roll that hasn't been modified, ie an unmodified roll.
The Wolf Standard doesn't ask for this.

I can sort of see where you're coming from, but I still don't believe that a dice roll of 1 means anything other than a dice that displays one when rolled... Even by that rule.

I see it as providing an extra restriction in these cases - no matter what the result of modifying the dice roll is (if there are modifiers) then a dice roll of a 1 is an auto pass and a dice roll of a 6 is an auto fail.

I see it as providing more clarity that the result and the roll are two different things when a modifier is involved.

I think that quote of yours grendel is introducing "natural" rolls into the characteristic rolls to ensure that there is always an option of failure. Otherwise there would be tests that could not be failed, similar to armour saves that cannot be failed break the game.

From the RE-ROLL Paragraph on p5. Note that any modifiers that applied to the first dice roll are also applied to the re-roll

I think that's quite clear. Modifiers are applied to a dice roll. Hence the dice that is an input to the equation of dice roll +/- modfier is a dice roll.

chezzie wrote:

From the RE-ROLL Paragraph on p5. Note that any modifiers that applied to the first dice roll are also applied to the re-roll

I think that's quite clear. Modifiers are applied to a dice roll. Hence the dice that is an input to the equation of dice roll +/- modfier is a dice roll.

Die Roll + Modifier ='s Result Is there anything I'm missing?

 grendel083 wrote:
It's asking for a roll that hasn't been modified, ie an unmodified roll.
The Wolf Standard doesn't ask for this.

Characteristic Tests actually are a third thing. They're not an unmodified test; they just have special exceptions for natural rolls of 1 or 6.

You can't use the wolf banner cause the dice rolled for charge are done in the charge sub phase not the fight sub phase.

 cgage00 wrote:
You can't use the wolf banner cause the dice rolled for charge are done in the charge sub phase not the fight sub phase.

Both of those are in the assault phase, which is what the wolf banner refers to (reroll all rolls of 1 during the ensuing assault phase)

Are people seriously trying to argue that 1D6 can offer results of 2-7? YMDC's mental gymnastics team is really going for the gold on this one.

Wolf Standard says to re-roll all 1s.

Mark of the Wulfen gives D6 + 1 attacks.

The dice roll is 1-6

Mark of the Wulfen is 2-7

The Wolf Standard doesn't care about the circumstance beyond its listed restrictions: D6 rolls in assault phase, no leadership tests. Nothing else matters. The D6 values are 1-6; it is only the Mark of the Wulfen values that are 2-7. Therefore, the Wolf Standard's effect kicks in before the Mark of the Wulfens' effect does; meaning you re-roll the 1 before you add Mark of the Wulfen's +1 attack.

 azazel the cat wrote:
Are people seriously trying to argue that 1D6 can offer results of 2-7?

No, but a D6+1 does.

 azazel the cat wrote:

YMDC's mental gymnastics team is really going for the gold on this one.

Wolf Standard says to re-roll all 1s.

Mark of the Wulfen gives D6 + 1 attacks.

The dice roll is 1-6

Mark of the Wulfen is 2-7

The Wolf Standard doesn't care about the circumstance beyond its listed restrictions: D6 rolls in assault phase, no leadership tests. Nothing else matters. The D6 values are 1-6; it is only the Mark of the Wulfen values that are 2-7. Therefore, the Wolf Standard's effect kicks in before the Mark of the Wulfens' effect does; meaning you re-roll the 1 before you add Mark of the Wulfen's +1 attack.

Citation needed for the underlined, as I can not find where it says that.


The dice roll is not a 1-6 as you have to add a +1 modifier to it. (It meaning the roll).

So the roll is a 2-7, and is never a 1 because of the modifier. Modifiers are applied to a dice roll. The equation of dice roll +/- modfier is a dice roll.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
Are people seriously trying to argue that 1D6 can offer results of 2-7?

No, but a D6+1 does.

 azazel the cat wrote:

YMDC's mental gymnastics team is really going for the gold on this one.

Wolf Standard says to re-roll all 1s.

Mark of the Wulfen gives D6 + 1 attacks.

The dice roll is 1-6

Mark of the Wulfen is 2-7

The Wolf Standard doesn't care about the circumstance beyond its listed restrictions: D6 rolls in assault phase, no leadership tests. Nothing else matters. The D6 values are 1-6; it is only the Mark of the Wulfen values that are 2-7. Therefore, the Wolf Standard's effect kicks in before the Mark of the Wulfens' effect does; meaning you re-roll the 1 before you add Mark of the Wulfen's +1 attack.

Citation needed for the underlined, as I can not find where it says that.


The dice roll is not a 1-6 as you have to add a +1 modifier to it. (It meaning the roll).

So the roll is a 2-7, and is never a 1 because of the modifier. Modifiers are applied to a dice roll. The equation of dice roll +/- modfier is a dice roll.

Actually a D6 can only roll a 1-6. Adding in a modifier would be the result of the Modifier + Die roll.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
Are people seriously trying to argue that 1D6 can offer results of 2-7?

No, but a D6+1 does.

 azazel the cat wrote:

YMDC's mental gymnastics team is really going for the gold on this one.

Wolf Standard says to re-roll all 1s.

Mark of the Wulfen gives D6 + 1 attacks.

The dice roll is 1-6

Mark of the Wulfen is 2-7

The Wolf Standard doesn't care about the circumstance beyond its listed restrictions: D6 rolls in assault phase, no leadership tests. Nothing else matters. The D6 values are 1-6; it is only the Mark of the Wulfen values that are 2-7. Therefore, the Wolf Standard's effect kicks in before the Mark of the Wulfens' effect does; meaning you re-roll the 1 before you add Mark of the Wulfen's +1 attack.

Citation needed for the underlined, as I can not find where it says that.


The dice roll is not a 1-6 as you have to add a +1 modifier to it. (It meaning the roll).

So the roll is a 2-7, and is never a 1 because of the modifier. Modifiers are applied to a dice roll. The equation of dice roll +/- modfier is a dice roll.

Actually a D6 can only roll a 1-6. Adding in a modifier would be the result of the Modifier + Die roll.

Also known as a modified D6 roll; which is different than a D6 roll, which is what the Wolf Standard applies to.

After all, if they're not two separate things, then it is impossible to ever auto-fail a WS test, as a D6 roll of 1 + WS will always be greater than 1. Yet the provision that 1 is an auto-fail exists, implying that a D6 roll of 1 is separate from the WS modifier (the base stat) that is added to the D6 roll.

A 2d6 roll is not a 1d6 roll. Anything allowing reroll of a d6 roll does not apply to a 2d6 roll.

Modifying the roll is basically irrelevant.

Reading the whole thread really fills you with a sense of how slow the bureaucracy on terra might be. I can see both sides of the argument and it is a slippery slope throughout. I personally side with the concept of D6 + 1 means roll the dice then add the modifier unless any rules specify a re roll as adding the modifier would be after the roll/re roll "phase" for lack of a better term. I honestly felt like something in the warp smiled after reading the constant back and forth and couldn't help but picture a multi colored bird stating "just as planned".

 azazel the cat wrote:
After all, if they're not two separate things, then it is impossible to ever auto-fail a WS test, as a D6 roll of 1 + WS will always be greater than 1. Yet the provision that 1 is an auto-fail exists, implying that a D6 roll of 1 is separate from the WS modifier (the base stat) that is added to the D6 roll.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Oh good than. Than when I roll a 1 to wound it's not really a 1 so it will wound.

Roll to wound D6+Str

OK, I'm curious as to where you get add Str to D6 to Wound, and add the Characteristic to the D6 for Characteristic tests comes from.

Now as to why I believe you can re-roll a modified dice roll:
First: Page 5 of the BRB refers to as the number rolled on the dice as "the roll" and then the modified number as the final result.
Second: Page 7 of the BRB says that a dice roll of X is always a failure, and a dice roll of Y is always a success, regardless of other modifiers. Again this implies at least that the result and the roll are separate.
Third: Page 29 of the Eldar Codex also states that if you roll "Y" that it counts as a failure (with no mention of modifiers). Again this implies that they consider the roll and the final result to be two separate things. Otherwise, with two Autarchs, you could have your entire army successfully come in from reserve on Turn 2 no matter what you rolled as the final result (if you choose to add 1 for each Autarch, and yes per the FAQ they stack), will be a minimum of 3.

I'm sure there are other examples, but I'm too lazy to find them (just got out of work and have to be back in 6 hours).

 azazel the cat wrote:

After all, if they're not two separate things, then it is impossible to ever auto-fail a WS test, as a D6 roll of 1 + WS will always be greater than 1.
Yet the provision that 1 is an auto-fail exists, implying that a D6 roll of 1 is separate from the WS modifier (the base stat) that is added to the D6 roll.

Yet no such provision exists in the Mark of the Wulven rule.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

After all, if they're not two separate things, then it is impossible to ever auto-fail a WS test, as a D6 roll of 1 + WS will always be greater than 1.
Yet the provision that 1 is an auto-fail exists, implying that a D6 roll of 1 is separate from the WS modifier (the base stat) that is added to the D6 roll.

Yet no such provision exists in the Mark of the Wulven rule.

So if a to wound roll of 1 auto fails, I never fail because it's 1+Str right?

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

After all, if they're not two separate things, then it is impossible to ever auto-fail a WS test, as a D6 roll of 1 + WS will always be greater than 1.
Yet the provision that 1 is an auto-fail exists, implying that a D6 roll of 1 is separate from the WS modifier (the base stat) that is added to the D6 roll.

Yet no such provision exists in the Mark of the Wulven rule.

So if a to wound roll of 1 auto fails, I never fail because it's 1+Str right?

Mark of the Wulven has nothing to do with Str.

 DeathReaper wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

After all, if they're not two separate things, then it is impossible to ever auto-fail a WS test, as a D6 roll of 1 + WS will always be greater than 1.
Yet the provision that 1 is an auto-fail exists, implying that a D6 roll of 1 is separate from the WS modifier (the base stat) that is added to the D6 roll.

Yet no such provision exists in the Mark of the Wulven rule.

So if a to wound roll of 1 auto fails, I never fail because it's 1+Str right?

Mark of the Wulven has nothing to do with Str.

However you're saying the Roll for MoTW of a 1 would actually be 2.

So by that logic a roll to wound would be a minimum of 2, hence never auto failing on a 1.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
However you're saying the Roll for MoTW of a 1 would actually be 2.

So by that logic a roll to wound would be a minimum of 2, hence never auto failing on a 1.

What roll to wound?

 DeathReaper wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
However you're saying the Roll for MoTW of a 1 would actually be 2.

So by that logic a roll to wound would be a minimum of 2, hence never auto failing on a 1.

What roll to wound?

Sorry, apparently lost my everloving mind.

Again DR you have chosen not to read the rules on modified dice rolls. It is clear, (a) roll a dice (b) apply modifier to that roll (c) find the final result. Nowhere in that is the final result called a dice roll, the roll is the action and result of the action before applying modifiers.

The final result is the roll. Do not ignore the context.

And as I pointed out, although GW may not outright say it (I think they do, but enough are arguing against it), they definitely imply that roll != final result (see Characteristic tests, and Master Strategist in C:Eldar).

Implication is all well and good but RAW is king and what does RAW say?

Context talks about modifying a roll, applying a modifier to a roll. It doesn't equate a roll with a modified roll. The context shows a clear distinction.

The final result is the roll, as per the section cited.

Pg 5 BRB section re-rolls, last sentence: "note that any modifiers that applied to the first dice roll are also applied to the re-roll."
This for me makes it clear that modifiers are applied after you re-roll. Although this sentence is in context of 2d6 etc, it is clearly a precedent where a modifier is separate to the roll of the dice and subsequent re-rolls

Actually, that wording would mean that the modifier had already applied before the re-roll.
So if you are re-rolling, then you've rolled... and if re-rolling includes modifiers...

 Digriz wrote:
Pg 5 BRB section re-rolls, last sentence: "note that any modifiers that applied to the first dice roll are also applied to the re-roll."
This for me makes it clear that modifiers are applied after you re-roll. Although this sentence is in context of 2d6 etc, it is clearly a precedent where a modifier is separate to the roll of the dice and subsequent re-rolls

So it's saying modifiers are applied to the first roll before re-rolls, as well as the second?
Then you definitely can't roll a 1.

Before I get shouted at for being unable to read previous post which I could not find, the book does cover the subject of rolling double 1's and double 6's in the case of Psyker mishap,
which would at least in this situation give precedence to re-rolling the dice for the Psyhic test, and if this gives precedence to other things well someone else figure that out.


And curse my spelling/grammar. (edit)

You're intentionally trying to obfuscate the meaning here. Please stop trying to play Who's On First.


The point is that it is a floating modifier. As in, the +1 hangs around, to apply to whatever dice roll is final. The dice roll can be re-rolled, but whatever the outcome, the +1 modifier will always be there. However, Mark of the Wulfen does not care about that modifier, it is only concerned with the dice roll, which is a value of between 1 and 6. This point I will not argue. I think a base tenet of EVERYTHING is the acceptance that a D6 roll can offer results ranging from 1 to 6. If this is something that cannot be understood.... then games that involve D6s are not for you.

A D6 roll can offer results ranging from 1 to 6. But we are told the to roll a D6+1, which yields 2-7.

That +1 doesn't come from the D6.

Case closed.

 azazel the cat wrote:
That +1 doesn't come from the D6.

Case closed.

This is true. It did ask for a Die roll. A D6 can only roll a 1-6.

And according to P.5 modifiers are applied to the dice roll, so a D6+1 can never be a 1, as you have a range of 2-7


Pg 5 BRB section re-rolls, last sentence: "note that any modifiers that applied to the first dice roll are also applied to the re-roll."

 DeathReaper wrote:
And according to P.5 modifiers are applied to the dice roll, so a D6+1 can never be a 1, as you have a range of 2-7


Pg 5 BRB section re-rolls, last sentence: "note that any modifiers that applied to the first dice roll are also applied to the re-roll."

Ok applied o the dice roll, and the dice roll are two seperate things.
The Dice roll will always be a 1-6 on a D6.

Pg 5 tells us that if the dice roll was D6+1 that the second reroll will still get the +1.

P.5 tells us that modifiers are applied to the dice roll. So you apply the modifier and the dice roll of D6+1 is never a 1 because you have to apply the modifier.

Basically the modifier modifies the 1 and makes it a 2, so it can never be a 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:

chezzie wrote:


Assuming those quotes were meant to be the other way around:

The rule says any dice rolls of a 1. For the mark of the wulfen I roll one die, and I get a 1. Is that or is that not a dice roll of a 1?

Edit for stupid wierd quoting

No it would not, as the Dice roll is a 2 in that case (D6 +1)

You have to add the +1 to get the result of the die roll, as you have not rolled a 1, you have rolled a 2.

It is the same with LD tests, you cant ever roll a 1, even if both dice come up ones, the lowest you can get is a two on two D6, just like the lowest you can get on the mark of the wulfen roll is a 2

The die roll would be a 1, the result would be a 2.

It's not the same as a Leadership test.
2D6 vs 1D6

With leadership you can have a pair of 1s which is 2 and that's the dice roll.

However with the MoTW it's a 1 that's the roll


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:
P.5 tells us that modifiers are applied to the dice roll. So you apply the modifier and the dice roll of D6+1 is never a 1 because you have to apply the modifier.

Basically the modifier modifies the 1 and makes it a 2, so it can never be a 1.

My dice must be lying than I always get a 1 for those ...

Modifying dice rolls defines a 2d6 roll as a modified dice roll.
If you agree that you cannot roll an individual d6 out of a 2d6 roll, then you also agree that modifiers are applied before evaluating if you're able to roll or not.

rigeld2 wrote:
Modifying dice rolls defines a 2d6 roll as a modified dice roll.
If you agree that you cannot roll an individual d6 out of a 2d6 roll, then you also agree that modifiers are applied before evaluating if you're able to roll or not.

Guess I don't agree than

I'm going back to work, play with you kiddos later.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Modifying dice rolls defines a 2d6 roll as a modified dice roll.
If you agree that you cannot roll an individual d6 out of a 2d6 roll, then you also agree that modifiers are applied before evaluating if you're able to roll or not.

Guess I don't agree than

I'm going back to work, play with you kiddos later.

So you are allowed to re-roll 1d6 out of the 2d6 roll?

The rules disagree with you.

 DeathReaper wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Modifying dice rolls defines a 2d6 roll as a modified dice roll.
If you agree that you cannot roll an individual d6 out of a 2d6 roll, then you also agree that modifiers are applied before evaluating if you're able to roll or not.

Guess I don't agree than

I'm going back to work, play with you kiddos later.

So you are allowed to re-roll 1d6 out of the 2d6 roll?

The rules disagree with you.

There is a difference between a re-roll of 2d6 and re-rolling a dice out of the 2d6. The rules even say this.. There is a specific restriction on re-rolls of 2d6, 3d6 etc that you must re-roll all of the dice unless otherwise stated.

That is why I said rules disagree with him.

Whole crakc, 6 pages of discusion on the mark of the wulfen. I rarly even play my SW anymore...I feel like a troll

 DeathReaper wrote:
That is why I said rules disagree with him.

Well it sounded like you were saying the rules don't allow you to re-roll single dice when they do, just not in every case.

rigeld2 wrote:Modifying dice rolls defines a 2d6 roll as a modified dice roll.
If you agree that you cannot roll an individual d6 out of a 2d6 roll, then you also agree that modifiers are applied before evaluating if you're able to roll or not.

That is an assumption that has no evidence outside of your imagination. You are effectively saying that D6+1 and 2D6 are the same thing, where in fact you are trying to compare apples to cars.

2D6 is not meant to be taken seperately, as it generates values between 2 and 12.
D6 + 1 is meant to generate values between 2 and 7

There is absolutely no mathematical rule that allows the two to behave in the same manner.

The discourse appears to be such:
1. D6 is the dice roll, with +1 being a modifier added to the fice roll to create the final value
2. D6+1 is the dice roll, where the +1 is considered part of the D6 value

this is an entirely seperate argument from the "2D6 =/= 2*D6" debate.

 azazel the cat wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Modifying dice rolls defines a 2d6 roll as a modified dice roll.
If you agree that you cannot roll an individual d6 out of a 2d6 roll, then you also agree that modifiers are applied before evaluating if you're able to roll or not.

That is an assumption that has no evidence outside of your imagination. You are effectively saying that D6+1 and 2D6 are the same thing, where in fact you are trying to compare apples to cars.

2D6 is not meant to be taken seperately, as it generates values between 2 and 12.
D6 + 1 is meant to generate values between 2 and 7

There is absolutely no mathematical rule that allows the two to behave in the same manner.

The discourse appears to be such:
1. D6 is the dice roll, with +1 being a modifier added to the fice roll to create the final value
2. D6+1 is the dice roll, where the +1 is considered part of the D6 value

this is an entirely seperate argument from the "2D6 =/= 2*D6" debate.

Very good, because in the 2*D6 example there is still a chance for a roll of a 1 while in 2d6 the roll is 2-12.

liturgies of blood wrote:Very good, because in the 2*D6 example there is still a chance for a roll of a 1 while in 2d6 the roll is 2-12.

Yes, exactly. 2*D6 gives the potential for 2x 1s, whereas 2D6 only gives values of 2-12. However, that is an entirely different thread (that I do not want to revive).

 azazel the cat wrote:
That is an assumption that has no evidence outside of your imagination. You are effectively saying that D6+1 and 2D6 are the same thing, where in fact you are trying to compare apples to cars.

2D6 is not meant to be taken seperately, as it generates values between 2 and 12.
D6 + 1 is meant to generate values between 2 and 7

There is absolutely no mathematical rule that allows the two to behave in the same manner.

The discourse appears to be such:
1. D6 is the dice roll, with +1 being a modifier added to the fice roll to create the final value
2. D6+1 is the dice roll, where the +1 is considered part of the D6 value

this is an entirely seperate argument from the "2D6 =/= 2*D6" debate.

Except its not separate.
We know that a 2d6 roll is defined as a modified dice roll. Do you agree?
We know that you are not permitted to re-roll part of a multi-d6 dice roll. Agreed?
So if you can't re-roll part of a d6+d6 roll, why are you allowed to re-roll part of a d6+1 roll?

rigeld2 wrote:
Except its not separate.
We know that a 2d6 roll is defined as a modified dice roll. Do you agree?
We know that you are not permitted to re-roll part of a multi-d6 dice roll. Agreed?
So if you can't re-roll part of a d6+d6 roll, why are you allowed to re-roll part of a d6+1 roll?

Citation for that?

I've cited it in the thread. Ill quote it for you so maybe you won't miss it this time.

You may also be told to roll a number of dice in one go, which is written as 2D6, 3D6 and so on. Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together, so a 2D6 roll is two dice rolled and added together for a result of 2-12.

Page 5.

rigeld2 wrote:

We know that you are not permitted to re-roll part of a multi-d6 dice roll. Agreed?
So if you can't re-roll part of a d6+d6 roll, why are you allowed to re-roll part of a d6+1 roll?

Well the rules say you must re-roll 2D6 together unless told to.
This train falls down right there.

No, actually - it doesn't.
It shows that the entire modified result is considered the roll.

rigeld2 wrote:
No, actually - it doesn't.
It shows that the entire modified result is considered the roll.

If you re-roll a single 2D6 or 3D6 roll, you must re-roll both of the dice and not just some of them, unless the rule granting the re-roll specifies otherwise.

The rules do say it.

So lets look at this,

sometimes you have to modify the number rolled on the dice(or "the roll").

The roll is the number rolled on the dice. So a dice that shows a one is a diceroll of a 1.

The next sentence is not important as it notes how to write the modifiers.

Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result.

The third sentence differentiates the roll from the result.
The 4th sentence shows how the process works, the number on the dice is differentiated from the result.
5th sentence what XD6 is and the 6th sentence shows how to roll it.
7th sentence doesn't matter.

The re-rolls from above show a more specific example of re-rolls not of all modified dice but of the XD6.

The re-roll section notes a 2d6 roll.
We know that a 2d6 roll is by definition a modified roll.
So we have a rule that equates the result of rolling two dice (a 2d6 roll) with its result.

Where? Can you give the quote please?

I see in the modified dice paragraph the roll is called a 2D6 roll but that the result is what you get when you add the two dice. I don't see where the roll and the result are equated in that.

 DeathReaper wrote:
That is why I said rules disagree with him.

Rules neither agree nor disagree.
They just are.

azazel the cat wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Except its not separate.
We know that a 2d6 roll is defined as a modified dice roll. Do you agree?
We know that you are not permitted to re-roll part of a multi-d6 dice roll. Agreed?
So if you can't re-roll part of a d6+d6 roll, why are you allowed to re-roll part of a d6+1 roll?

Citation for that?

rigeld2 wrote:I've cited it in the thread. Ill quote it for you so maybe you won't miss it this time.

You may also be told to roll a number of dice in one go, which is written as 2D6, 3D6 and so on. Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together, so a 2D6 roll is two dice rolled and added together for a result of 2-12.

Page 5.

How about you actually cite what I've asked? Because I don't see any references to 2D6 being defined as a modified dice roll.

Since the section I quoted is under the modified dice rolls section, I did exactly that.

page 5 "MODIFYING DICE ROLLS" section.

"You may also be told to roll a number of dice in one go, which is written as 2D6, 3D6 and so on. Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together, so a 2D6 roll is two dice rolled and added together"

A number of dice in one go is a modified Dice Roll. for example 2d6 is a modified dice roll, as it tells you in the modified dice rolls about 2D6 rolls.

In the same section it says "For example, D6+2 means roll a dice and add 2 to the number on the dice for a total between 3 and 8."

Therefore D6+2 = 3-8, and D6+1 = 2-7.

So an Eldar army with two Autarchs will be able to bring in all of his reserves on Turn 2 regardless if he rolls a 1 (which still fails) because the final result is all that matters and would be a 3. Now if only my Autarchs could affect my Deathwing allies with that...

 Happyjew wrote:
So an Eldar army with two Autarchs will be able to bring in all of his reserves on Turn 2 regardless if he rolls a 1 (which still fails) because the final result is all that matters and would be a 3. Now if only my Autarchs could affect my Deathwing allies with that...

Good try, but incorrect.

The reserve rules specify that "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124 (This is further proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll).

Does the Wolf standard specify a natural roll of a 1 may be re-rolled? (If it specifies a natural roll of a 1 then this debate is over, of course if it does not, it is over as well).

Sigh, sadly I can see both sides to the party. I will continue to re-roll 1's on a MotW roll, and if my opponent disagrees, then we'll roll-off to see who's interpretation is correct. At the end of the day, its not a huge deal.

*sigh*

MODIFYING DICE ROLLS (BRB, p. 5)
Sometimes, you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice (or 'on the roll'). This is noted as D6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result. For example, D6+2 means roll a dice and add 2 to the number on the dice for a total between 3 and 8. You may also be told to roll a number of dice... etc.

WOLF STANDARD (SW Codex, p. 62)
...For the duration of the next Assault Phase, all models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.


Please pay attention to the wording of the Modifying Dice Rolls section. It clearly defines and demonstrates the difference between the "roll" and the "final result": the roll is prior to the modifier, whereas the final result is after the modifier.

Now look at the wording of the Wolf Standard. it states that a unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1. It says rolls. It does NOT say "results of a 1".

Because the Wolf Standard allows the player to re-roll the ROLLS of a 1 (as opposed to the RESULT of a 1), the player definitely CAN use the Wolf Standard on Mark of the Wulfen.



There. Done. This discussion should be over now.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
So an Eldar army with two Autarchs will be able to bring in all of his reserves on Turn 2 regardless if he rolls a 1 (which still fails) because the final result is all that matters and would be a 3. Now if only my Autarchs could affect my Deathwing allies with that...

Good try, but incorrect.

The reserve rules specify that "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124 (This is further proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll).

Does the Wolf standard specify a natural roll of a 1 may be re-rolled? (If it specifies a natural roll of a 1 then this debate is over, of course if it does not, it is over as well).

Dang, I knew I was missing something.

So have the no side found a reason yet?
We had look at d6+1 and roll vs result.
Next we had 2d6 in re-rolls equates result with result(not roll).
So where does it equate a roll with the result?
If you cannot show that a roll is the result in a modified roll why can you not re-roll the dice in a single d6 modified roll?

The reserve rules say that "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124 (This is further proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll).

They actually specify "a natural roll of a 1" so there is a difference between a roll of a 1, and a natural roll of a 1 as far as the rules are concerned.

I repeat myself:


MODIFYING DICE ROLLS (BRB, p. 5)
Sometimes, you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice (or 'on the roll'). This is noted as D6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result. For example, D6+2 means roll a dice and add 2 to the number on the dice for a total between 3 and 8. You may also be told to roll a number of dice... etc.

WOLF STANDARD (SW Codex, p. 62)
...For the duration of the next Assault Phase, all models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.


Please pay attention to the wording of the Modifying Dice Rolls section. It clearly defines and demonstrates the difference between the "roll" and the "final result": the roll is prior to the modifier, whereas the final result is after the modifier.

Now look at the wording of the Wolf Standard. it states that a unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1. It says rolls. It does NOT say "results of a 1".

Because the Wolf Standard allows the player to re-roll the ROLLS of a 1 (as opposed to the RESULT of a 1), the player definitely CAN use the Wolf Standard on Mark of the Wulfen.



I will also point out that this reasoning makes use only of the two directly relevant rules sections.

Does the Wolf standard specify "a natural roll of a 1"?

If not then it is the modified roll.

DeathReaper, you are just inventing your own rules now. At no point in the Modifying Dice Rolls section does anything reference the term "natural roll"; however, the example given which supports me is even D6+1, the very same modifier we are debating.

You can obstinately deny this all you want, but you're going to have to actually use citations that directly apply to the rules in question. I've even taken the time to copy out the two relevant rules for you. Unless you can do that, enjoy holding your breathe and pouting while everyone else re-rolls for Mark of the Wulfen.




Anyway, I've proven that you can use the Wolf Standard on Mark of the Wulfen, hung around to wait for any real counter-arguments, and I see there are none. So my work here is done.

Here is your citation:

The reserve rules say: "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124

Here is the proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll.

You have not proven anything, as my rules quote shows the flaw in your argument.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Here is your citation:

The reserve rules say: "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124

Here is the proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll.

You have not proven anything, as my rules quote shows the flaw in your argument.

Sorry DR his makes perfect sense. In the case of the Reserves rules it appears they were just overclarifying things.
Argue it all you like.

However In the quote you have There's no such thing as a natural 1 regardless of modifiers. As the result of a die roll in your opinion is Dice+Modifier='s Dice roll.

3rd try, swing and a miss.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The proof modifiers aren't part of the dice roll is on page 5.

Reserves specify unmodified roll. Wolf Standard does not.

P.5 tells us that 2d6 is a modified roll and add them together. We also know we can not re-roll just one of the 2d6 roll, even if both of the dice are a 1.

The same applies to D6+1.

I do not understand why you keep talking about reserve rolls, when I have cited a more relevant rule, other than the fact that you think this debate isn't over.

You lost this one, kid. But that doesn't mean you have to like it.






Also: you're reading the re-roll 2d6 wrong, as well. It doesn't say that you cannot re-roll it; it says that you must re-roll both or not at all. Because the wolf standard allows you to re-roll all rolls of 1, and the dice rolls are defined as being prior to any modifiers as defined on p.5, you would RAW be allowed to re-roll 2d6 with the wolf standard, but only in the event of double 1s.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
again, i will repeat myself. DeathReaper, please do not respond unless you can directly refute what I have laid out here with relevant citations.


MODIFYING DICE ROLLS (BRB, p. 5)
Sometimes, you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice (or 'on the roll'). This is noted as D6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result. For example, D6+2 means roll a dice and add 2 to the number on the dice for a total between 3 and 8. You may also be told to roll a number of dice... etc.

WOLF STANDARD (SW Codex, p. 62)
...For the duration of the next Assault Phase, all models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.


Please pay attention to the wording of the Modifying Dice Rolls section. It clearly defines and demonstrates the difference between the "roll" and the "final result": the roll is prior to the modifier, whereas the final result is after the modifier.

Now look at the wording of the Wolf Standard. it states that a unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1. It says rolls. It does NOT say "results of a 1".

Because the Wolf Standard allows the player to re-roll the ROLLS of a 1 (as opposed to the RESULT of a 1), the player definitely CAN use the Wolf Standard on Mark of the Wulfen.



I will also point out that this reasoning makes use only of the two directly relevant rules sections.





This thread can probably be locked now, as nobody else appears to believe it needs to be debated any further, and it is bordering on necrotic at this point.

My understanding of a natural roll of one is a dice roll of one before any modifiers from wargear or other items etc are applied. I dont think the term 'natural 1' can be applied to this situation as the modifier comes from the +1 on the D6, not from a different source. now, if the MotW roll could be modified by warger down to a 1 or indeed above a 1, you might need to state natural rolls of 1 only, however as it cant, its a moot point and therefore not implicitly mentioned.
I again will continue to re-roll 1's unless an FAQ comes up. If an opponent disagrees and sides with the DeathReaper argument, then a simple roll off would determine which ruling to apply for that game.

Digriz wrote:My understanding of a natural roll of one is a dice roll of one before any modifiers from wargear or other items etc are applied. I dont think the term 'natural 1' can be applied to this situation as the modifier comes from the +1 on the D6, not from a different source. now, if the MotW roll could be modified by warger down to a 1 or indeed above a 1, you might need to state natural rolls of 1 only, however as it cant, its a moot point and therefore not implicitly mentioned.
I again will continue to re-roll 1's unless an FAQ comes up. If an opponent disagrees and sides with the DeathReaper argument, then a simple roll off would determine which ruling to apply for that game.

Nah, just print off my argument. It's solid. That's why DeathReaper hasn't been able to crack it and instead keeps talking about unrelated Reserve rolls.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Digriz wrote:My understanding of a natural roll of one is a dice roll of one before any modifiers from wargear or other items etc are applied. I dont think the term 'natural 1' can be applied to this situation as the modifier comes from the +1 on the D6, not from a different source. now, if the MotW roll could be modified by warger down to a 1 or indeed above a 1, you might need to state natural rolls of 1 only, however as it cant, its a moot point and therefore not implicitly mentioned.
I again will continue to re-roll 1's unless an FAQ comes up. If an opponent disagrees and sides with the DeathReaper argument, then a simple roll off would determine which ruling to apply for that game.

Nah, just print off my argument. It's solid. That's why DeathReaper hasn't been able to crack it and instead keeps talking about unrelated Reserve rolls.

It is not solid, as it ignores the valid points in my argument.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Digriz wrote:My understanding of a natural roll of one is a dice roll of one before any modifiers from wargear or other items etc are applied. I dont think the term 'natural 1' can be applied to this situation as the modifier comes from the +1 on the D6, not from a different source. now, if the MotW roll could be modified by warger down to a 1 or indeed above a 1, you might need to state natural rolls of 1 only, however as it cant, its a moot point and therefore not implicitly mentioned.
I again will continue to re-roll 1's unless an FAQ comes up. If an opponent disagrees and sides with the DeathReaper argument, then a simple roll off would determine which ruling to apply for that game.

Nah, just print off my argument. It's solid. That's why DeathReaper hasn't been able to crack it and instead keeps talking about unrelated Reserve rolls.

It is not solid, as it ignores the valid points in my argument.

These are rolls where the result is not the only metric that decided the outcome. A natural roll is further re-enforcement that there is a different between the roll and the result.
A natural roll is not referenced in the "How to Roll Dice" section of the book, this is a more specific restriction on your dice roll to pass the reserve roll.

So 2d6, is down, this looks like a reach and you have no support within page 5 for your belief. Why can the wolf banner not allow a GH to re-roll his MOTW.

Also there are pieces of wargear that can reduce the number of attacks that a MOTW model has iirc. Are there not items in some of the codices that reduce the number of attacks a model has in cc?

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Why can the wolf banner not allow a GH to re-roll his MOTW.

Because there is a difference between a 'Roll of a 1' (Which the Wolf standard can never get) and a 'Natural roll of a 1' (Which reserve rolls specify).
The reserve rules about rolls, and a 'Natural roll of a 1' show that the two are in fact different, as they specify a 'Natural roll of a 1' and not just a 'Roll of a 1'.

The reserve rules show that modifiers are added into the roll, and thus you can not roll a 1 on a D6+1 roll. Thus the player definitely CAN NOT use the Wolf Standard on Mark of the Wulfen.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Does the Wolf standard specify a natural roll of a 1 may be re-rolled?

Yes. It says if you reroll a die result of 1. If you want to play house rules, please be my guest, though.

Listen DR the rules say that the result of a modified roll is what you get after the dice is rolled and apply the modifier. This is fact.
The rules talk separately about the roll and the result. In this SPECIFIC example you have tried to use, the RESULT is not the only thing that matters. The RESULT and the ROLL are taken into account. It is to prevent situations where there are multiple additions to the reserve roll such as you cannot fail the roll.

The natural roll is the bit before you apply the modifier....
roll and result are different. Natural rolls are widely used in many games that use modifiers, it is just the roll before you apply the modifier.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There are numerous abilities where a modifier can be applied to a test where a model still fails on a natural rolls of a 1 or 6.
Characteristics tests such as the initiative test for JOTWW when applied to monstrous creatures.

This is a special case and not the norm... so rolls are general and the roll for reserves is specific.

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Does the Wolf standard specify a natural roll of a 1 may be re-rolled?

Yes. It says if you reroll a die result of 1. If you want to play house rules, please be my guest, though.

The bolded is absolutely false.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
This is a special case and not the norm... so rolls are general and the roll for reserves is specific.

So you're asserting there's a difference between a natural roll and a roll? If not - Why are you saying that reserves are a special case?
Why did they specify "natural" roll?

The difference is that a roll is, if unmodified, the result. While in a modified roll, the roll or natural roll is not the result. The natural roll is important as the result is not the only metric in that specific test.

Outside of the How to roll section, the language of roll and result are not as careful, for example in many places it says "on a roll of X+" this could lead people to think that the roll is the result. While the X+ is the desired result under the rules. I defer to the section that talks about how to roll to judge how a dice is rolled, other sections may include odd dice modifiers, hammer hand for example, these are more specific rules and are not the general rule.

So in one case they're distinct... but in many other cases they aren't really distinct.

That lends credence to the idea that overall, they are not distinct.

As I said in the edit, specific vs general. In the general a modified roll's result is different from the roll.
In a case where a natural roll has an effect this is a more specific example where not only D6+X must be >Y but also D6 > 1.
The reserves and other "natural roll" tests have a more specific metric to their pass fail than a result of a (modified) dice roll. If I make a save or a roll to hit and a modifier is applied then the result is the only thing we care about when it comes to the rules. HOWEVER in this example the rules have an additional restriction that is not in the basic rules.

Hey, Rigeld2- why don't you take a crack at my argument? DeathReaper has given up and seems to be under the impression that reserve rolls in any way have have something to do with the Wolf Standard.

 azazel the cat wrote:
Hey, Rigeld2- why don't you take a crack at my argument? DeathReaper has given up and seems to be under the impression that reserve rolls in any way have have something to do with the Wolf Standard.

Well, since they do...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
As I said in the edit, specific vs general. In the general a modified roll's result is different from the roll.
In a case where a natural roll has an effect this is a more specific example where not only D6+X must be >Y but also D6 > 1.

So in general a modified roll is different from a roll.
And specifically, a roll is different from a natural roll.

Is that what you're saying?

rigeld2 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
Hey, Rigeld2- why don't you take a crack at my argument? DeathReaper has given up and seems to be under the impression that reserve rolls in any way have have something to do with the Wolf Standard.

Well, since they do...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
As I said in the edit, specific vs general. In the general a modified roll's result is different from the roll.
In a case where a natural roll has an effect this is a more specific example where not only D6+X must be >Y but also D6 > 1.

So in general a modified roll is different from a roll.
And specifically, a roll is different from a natural roll.

Is that what you're saying?

No! I am saying a roll is different from a result.
A natural roll is a roll that is considered by the rules in addition to the result.

Rolling two ones is not rolling a one.
As rolling 2 1d6 is not the same as rolling 2d6.

Modifying the roll is still irrelevant.

Fast rolling confuses people.

A modified roll is different to a roll because it has a different section in the rule book. It's a roll where you apply a modifier to find the result.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
As I said in the edit, specific vs general. In the general a modified roll's result is different from the roll.
In a case where a natural roll has an effect this is a more specific example where not only D6+X must be >Y but also D6 > 1.

rigeld2 wrote:So in general a modified roll is different from a roll.
And specifically, a roll is different from a natural roll.

Is that what you're saying?

No! I am saying a roll is different from a result.
A natural roll is a roll that is considered by the rules in addition to the result.

So the word "natural" there is redundant - since any reference to roll must mean without modifiers.

Natural roll is a general gaming term tbh, it seems to be the correct term to clarify the difference between rolling 1 on your dice and applying a +3 to the reserves roll, getting a result of a 4 and rolling a 2 and applying a 2+ modifier to get a 4. Example 1 fails and example 2 doesn't.

Actually no it isn't redundant, as in the dice rolling section, the result is the application of the modifier to the dice and that is what you go by when it comes to your tests while the roll is generally ignored beyond that. In this case the roll has an additional effect. Similar to the additional effect that is applied to the roll when using the wolf standard. It doesn't matter how big your modifier is in these two cases a dice roll of a 1 causes an effect.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Natural roll is a general gaming term tbh, it seems to be the correct term to clarify the difference between rolling 1 on your dice and applying a +3 to the reserves roll, getting a result of a 4 and rolling a 2 and applying a 2+ modifier to get a 4. Example 1 fails and example 2 doesn't.

Right - and with the definition you assert for roll, the exact same thing is true.

Actually no it isn't redundant, as in the dice rolling section, the result is the application of the modifier to the dice and that is what you go by when it comes to your tests while the roll is generally ignored beyond that. In this case the roll has an additional effect. Similar to the additional effect that is applied to the roll when using the wolf standard. It doesn't matter how big your modifier is in these two cases a dice roll of a 1 causes an effect.

So it's a clarification? natural roll and roll are not synonymous?

You're asserting that a "natural roll" is the number on a die without any modifications.
You're asserting that a "roll" is the number on the die without any modifications.

Please correct either of those statements.