For the command re-roll strategem, it just states "you can re-roll any single dice". Now it doesn't say anything under rerolls about specific players or you can't reroll an opponent's dice. Would you be able to reroll a dice your opponent has rolled or is there automatic belief that if you didn't roll a dice, then how could you re-roll it since you never rolled it?
Why not? Rules evidence would be good. The dice was rolled. You're told you can re-roll it. There doesn't appear to be a stipulation that you had to be the one to roll it in the first place.
Well, another for the FAQ pile. I would say that as you use strategems in your turn, it should apply only to your rolls.
And yet, that would mean you can force your opponent to reroll his saves, and the strategem does allow you to reroll your saves.
The intent is clearly supposed to be for your rolls, but its not actually all that clear.
I hope not. Messing with other people's rolls are a big no-no in my book.
Back in 7th, a friend of mine tried to rule in that the 3rd result from Strategic Warlord trait (the one you can re-roll reserves) could let you re-roll your opponent's reserves. This was obviously a misinterpretation of his and noone accepted that.
Also, there was another result in that table that specifically called for enemy rolls, so there's that.
Finally, AFAIK this is a permissive ruleset - you can only do what the rules tell what you can do. Nowhere it says you can apply that rule to your enemy's rolls, so why would you?
Finally, AFAIK this is a permissive ruleset - you can only do what the rules tell what you can do. Nowhere it says you can apply that rule to your enemy's rolls, so why would you?
This is a misapplication of the principle. You don't need specific permission after general permission is granted. If I'm about to move my tactical marines, you can't argue that that's against the rules because the movement rules don't specifically give me permission to move a unit of tactical marines, instead just giving me general permission to move my units. If I can move any of my units then I can move any of my units. If I can "re-roll any single dice" then I can re-roll any single dice. Is that a single dice? Then I can re-roll it.
I mean, does it even say anywhere that you're allowed to apply the stratagem to your own dice? Looking at it and the general re-roll rules, none of it ever seems to care who rolled the dice in the first place. I agree that this is probably unintended.
Also this seems to allow dice to be re-rolled more than once. If my opponent rolls a die, I can use a CP to re-roll it. I am then not allowed to re-roll that die again. But my opponent could still use a CP to re-roll it.
Why not? Rules evidence would be good. The dice was rolled. You're told you can re-roll it. There doesn't appear to be a stipulation that you had to be the one to roll it in the first place.
because a command dice lets YOU re roll a dice. The dice your opponent rolled can never be a reroll if you pick it up becuase you weren't the person who rolled it.
Why not? Rules evidence would be good. The dice was rolled. You're told you can re-roll it. There doesn't appear to be a stipulation that you had to be the one to roll it in the first place.
because a command dice lets YOU re roll a dice. The dice your opponent rolled can never be a reroll if you pick it up becuase you weren't the person who rolled it.
That's a semantic argument. I can do the say.
A die was rolled. I picked it up and rolled it. From the die's perspective, it was re-rolled. I was the one who re-rolled it. We don't know who originally rolled it.
Semantic arguments aren't going to convince anyone during an actual game. This probably needs an FAQ.
There's no precedent in the game that would ever lead one to believe they can pick up a dice rolled by their opponent and re-roll it for them. That's a ridiculous assertion.
If it were intended to force an opponent to re-roll a dice, it would say that. ie "you can re-roll any single dice or force your opponent to re-roll any single dice."
because a command dice lets YOU re roll a dice. The dice your opponent rolled can never be a reroll if you pick it up becuase you weren't the person who rolled it.
A re-roll is defined: "which means you get to roll some or all of the dice again". In English it is really common to talk about doing something again even if you were not the one who originally did it.
Here is the literal, verbatim rule on re-rolls from the rulebook:
" Re-rolls:
Some rules allow you to re-roll a dice roll, which means you get to roll some or all of the dice again. You can never re-roll a dice more than once, and re-rolls happen before any modifiers (if any) are applied."
And here's the rule for command re-roll
"Command Re-roll
Stratagem
You can re-roll any single dice."
Since you're the one doing the re-roll, you must now adhere to the re-roll rules, which mention you can roll one of the dice again. If you didn't roll it to begin with, then you can't roll it "again", now can you? You don't get to roll an opponents hit, wound, damage, save, any dice at all. Only your own.
Jackal444 wrote: Here is the literal, verbatim rule on re-rolls from the rulebook:
" Re-rolls:
Some rules allow you to re-roll a dice roll, which means you get to roll some or all of the dice again. You can never re-roll a dice more than once, and re-rolls happen before any modifiers (if any) are applied."
And here's the rule for command re-roll
"Command Re-roll
Stratagem
You can re-roll any single dice."
Since you're the one doing the re-roll, you must now adhere to the re-roll rules, which mention you can roll one of the dice again. If you didn't roll it to begin with, then you can't roll it "again", now can you? You don't get to roll an opponents hit, wound, damage, save, any dice at all. Only your own.
While I believe this is the spirit of the rule, it's a semantic argument. This needs to be definitively FAQed.
Jackal444 wrote: Here is the literal, verbatim rule on re-rolls from the rulebook:
" Re-rolls:
Some rules allow you to re-roll a dice roll, which means you get to roll some or all of the dice again. You can never re-roll a dice more than once, and re-rolls happen before any modifiers (if any) are applied."
And here's the rule for command re-roll
"Command Re-roll
Stratagem
You can re-roll any single dice."
Since you're the one doing the re-roll, you must now adhere to the re-roll rules, which mention you can roll one of the dice again. If you didn't roll it to begin with, then you can't roll it "again", now can you? You don't get to roll an opponents hit, wound, damage, save, any dice at all. Only your own.
I mean, of course you can roll it again even if you weren't the one who rolled it the first time. Like I said, this is a really common construction, at least in American English. You have to have encountered it tons of times. Perhaps British English is different.
I mean, of course you can roll it again even if you weren't the one who rolled it the first time. Like I said, this is a really common construction, at least in American English. .
GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
It needs to be FAQ'd. There are plenty of games where choosing the right moment to re-roll an opponent's die can be game changing. I play a ton of Star Wars Destiny and re-rolling an opponent's die is a common phenomenon. It's like re-rolling an opponent's die is a universal gaming taboo or anything.
My guess is that the intent is for you to only re-roll your own dice. I can easily understand why people read it as re-rolling any die result.
I mean, of course you can roll it again even if you weren't the one who rolled it the first time. Like I said, this is a really common construction, at least in American English. .
No. It's not.
It is.
eg. You build a castle, an enemy army takes the castle, you then gather an army and retake it.
eg. Resizing an image, you paste an image into a program the computer automatically sizes it, you resize it to how big you want it.
eg. You buy a model off ebay, you don't like how the last guy painted it so you repaint it.
eg. A species dies out in an area, someone then comes along and reintroduces that species.
I'm not saying I agree with rerolling enemy dice and it's not HIWPI but RAW it is possible IMHO. Definitely needs an FAQ.
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
Automatically Appended Next Post:
davethepak wrote: Really? Someone thinks they can make and opponent re-roll one of their dice?
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
You can feel it's as official as you want, but some guy on a forum saying that in a live video they saw one time GW said thus is not something every player has access to. GW needs to make a real statement or it's not official.
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
You can feel it's as official as you want, but some guy on a forum saying that in a live video they saw one time GW said thus is not something every player has access to. GW needs to make a real statement or it's not official.
But it's the official Live Stream of GW as advertised on THEIR Community Website AND promoted on their official Facebook Page, As it's played by THEIR official game-testers. It was said in the official GW TWITCH as well, by more people who officially play-tested the game. How much more official do you need it to be? NO You cannot re-roll your opponents dice roll. There isn't a discussion here.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not everything needs an FAQ use common sense and be decent humans versus WAAC players, that's the whole reason we have 8th Edition to begin with
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
You can feel it's as official as you want, but some guy on a forum saying that in a live video they saw one time GW said thus is not something every player has access to. GW needs to make a real statement or it's not official.
But it's the official Live Stream of GW as advertised on THEIR Community Website AND promoted on their official Facebook Page, As it's played by THEIR official game-testers. It was said in the official GW TWITCH as well, by more people who officially play-tested the game. How much more official do you need it to be? NO You cannot re-roll your opponents dice roll. There isn't a discussion here.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not everything needs an FAQ use common sense and be decent humans versus WAAC players, that's the whole reason we have 8th Edition to begin with
It needs to be posted, in writing, as a document that is easily accessible for all players. That document needs to be posted in a place that is clearly labeled as a place for FAQs and Errata.
Keep in mind that 12 months from now the book will still be written the same way and some new player who is not looking through every twitch recording for the last year needs to be able to get that clarification. Until GW posts is in a way that every person who plays can reasonably see the ruling there is no ruling.
But it's the official Live Stream of GW as advertised on THEIR Community Website AND promoted on their official Facebook Page, As it's played by THEIR official game-testers. It was said in the official GW TWITCH as well, by more people who officially play-tested the game. How much more official do you need it to be? NO You cannot re-roll your opponents dice roll. There isn't a discussion here.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not everything needs an FAQ use common sense and be decent humans versus WAAC players, that's the whole reason we have 8th Edition to begin with
People might be more inclined to believe it if there was a link to the video, otherwise that statement is worth about as much as someone saying I emailed gw about it and they said this.
Just because someone, somewhere, decides that something is unclear, doesn't mean it's unclear. Nor does it mean that the "question" is being asked "frequently". You may get an FaQ for it (recommend holding your breath) but that hardly means one was necessary.
EDIT: And if you DO get an FaQ, remember that I was right, because I bet a dollar I will be.
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
You can feel it's as official as you want, but some guy on a forum saying that in a live video they saw one time GW said thus is not something every player has access to. GW needs to make a real statement or it's not official.
But it's the official Live Stream of GW as advertised on THEIR Community Website AND promoted on their official Facebook Page, As it's played by THEIR official game-testers. It was said in the official GW TWITCH as well, by more people who officially play-tested the game. How much more official do you need it to be? NO You cannot re-roll your opponents dice roll. There isn't a discussion here.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not everything needs an FAQ use common sense and be decent humans versus WAAC players, that's the whole reason we have 8th Edition to begin with
It needs to be posted, in writing, as a document that is easily accessible for all players. That document needs to be posted in a place that is clearly labeled as a place for FAQs and Errata.
Keep in mind that 12 months from now the book will still be written the same way and some new player who is not looking through every twitch recording for the last year needs to be able to get that clarification. Until GW posts is in a way that every person who plays can reasonably see the ruling there is no ruling.
1. It's the businesses discretion how they make their rules official including putting it in a video you have to find .
2. But yes they should make it easier for people who get into the game late and don't know to look for that.
3. It doesn't change the fact that they said it, so NO to re-rolling opponents dice, This wouldn't have flown anyway because of the image from the core rulebook. every mention of reroll says you reroll not your opponent rerolls.
Keep in mind that 12 months from now the book will still be written the same way and some new player who is not looking through every twitch recording for the last year needs to be able to get that clarification. Until GW posts is in a way that every person who plays can reasonably see the ruling there is no ruling.
no.... This is such a stretch of RAW that EVERYONE realizes that any hint that you could do this is an oversight and an attempt at semantic surgery on the rules text to an extreme level. No new players are going assume you can do this, and if they do, ANY other players will address it quickly.
It's like if I was playing a game of magic, and when it was my turn to play a land, I went and picked up a land that my opponent had put down and played it on my field.
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
You can feel it's as official as you want, but some guy on a forum saying that in a live video they saw one time GW said thus is not something every player has access to. GW needs to make a real statement or it's not official.
But it's the official Live Stream of GW as advertised on THEIR Community Website AND promoted on their official Facebook Page, As it's played by THEIR official game-testers. It was said in the official GW TWITCH as well, by more people who officially play-tested the game. How much more official do you need it to be? NO You cannot re-roll your opponents dice roll. There isn't a discussion here.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not everything needs an FAQ use common sense and be decent humans versus WAAC players, that's the whole reason we have 8th Edition to begin with
It needs to be posted, in writing, as a document that is easily accessible for all players. That document needs to be posted in a place that is clearly labeled as a place for FAQs and Errata.
Keep in mind that 12 months from now the book will still be written the same way and some new player who is not looking through every twitch recording for the last year needs to be able to get that clarification. Until GW posts is in a way that every person who plays can reasonably see the ruling there is no ruling.
1. It's the businesses discretion how they make their rules official including putting it in a video you have to find .
2. But yes they should make it easier for people who get into the game late and don't know to look for that.
3. It doesn't change the fact that they said it, so NO to re-rolling opponents dice, This wouldn't have flown anyway because of the image from the core rulebook. every mention of reroll says you reroll not your opponent rerolls.
When I spend MY Command Point I can pick up YOUR dice and attempt to change the end result with MY reroll. Of course I would be happy to let you roll it as it's polite to not touch your stuff. But RAW there is nothing that specifies it cannot happen and the permission I have is to reroll any 1 dice. "Any 1 dice" is very broad and actually includes all the dice.
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
You can feel it's as official as you want, but some guy on a forum saying that in a live video they saw one time GW said thus is not something every player has access to. GW needs to make a real statement or it's not official.
But it's the official Live Stream of GW as advertised on THEIR Community Website AND promoted on their official Facebook Page, As it's played by THEIR official game-testers. It was said in the official GW TWITCH as well, by more people who officially play-tested the game. How much more official do you need it to be? NO You cannot re-roll your opponents dice roll. There isn't a discussion here.
And GW has had clear errors in battle reports posted in White Dwarf. It needs a FAQ, not just a Twitch video as the FAQs are GW's only official source of rules clarifications.
I am not even saying your interpretation is wrong. I am saying right now there is a good argument that RAW you can reroll ANY dice including the opponents. RAI it could be otherwise. But the core rules right now are full of holes like this (and some WAY WAY worse).
Right now there are BatReps where people are using it to force rerolls on opponents dice. So it's not as cut and dry as you assume. And when I am at the table if my opponent approached me with the interpretation of the rule that he could force rerolls on my dice I would be some kind of lunatic to tell him to go look for a twitch recording and watch the whole video to learn that one time GW said something that might contradict his understanding of the rule. I wouldn't stop the game for him to try to do that. I wouldn't suggest that he do that. And anyone who would is more of a WAAC player than the guy who just read the poorly written language in the rule book.
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
You can feel it's as official as you want, but some guy on a forum saying that in a live video they saw one time GW said thus is not something every player has access to. GW needs to make a real statement or it's not official.
But it's the official Live Stream of GW as advertised on THEIR Community Website AND promoted on their official Facebook Page, As it's played by THEIR official game-testers. It was said in the official GW TWITCH as well, by more people who officially play-tested the game. How much more official do you need it to be? NO You cannot re-roll your opponents dice roll. There isn't a discussion here.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not everything needs an FAQ use common sense and be decent humans versus WAAC players, that's the whole reason we have 8th Edition to begin with
It needs to be posted, in writing, as a document that is easily accessible for all players. That document needs to be posted in a place that is clearly labeled as a place for FAQs and Errata.
Keep in mind that 12 months from now the book will still be written the same way and some new player who is not looking through every twitch recording for the last year needs to be able to get that clarification. Until GW posts is in a way that every person who plays can reasonably see the ruling there is no ruling.
1. It's the businesses discretion how they make their rules official including putting it in a video you have to find .
2. But yes they should make it easier for people who get into the game late and don't know to look for that.
3. It doesn't change the fact that they said it, so NO to re-rolling opponents dice, This wouldn't have flown anyway because of the image from the core rulebook. every mention of reroll says you reroll not your opponent rerolls.
When I spend MY Command Point I can pick up YOUR dice and attempt to change the end result with MY reroll. Of course I would be happy to let you roll it as it's polite to not touch your stuff. But RAW there is nothing that specifies it cannot happen and the permission I have is to reroll any 1 dice. "Any 1 dice" is very broad and actually includes all the dice.
"
NO YOU AREN'T! you are definitely not going to pick up MY die with the "reroll" you aren't allowed to make. You do not ever get to make the roll for someone else why would this be any different certain abilities say they force your opponent to reroll but you do not get to reroll anything of mine.
Keep in mind that 12 months from now the book will still be written the same way and some new player who is not looking through every twitch recording for the last year needs to be able to get that clarification. Until GW posts is in a way that every person who plays can reasonably see the ruling there is no ruling.
no.... This is such a stretch of RAW that EVERYONE realizes that any hint that you could do this is an oversight and an attempt at semantic surgery on the rules text to an extreme level. No new players are going assume you can do this, and if they do, ANY other players will address it quickly.
It's like if I was playing a game of magic, and when it was my turn to play a land, I went and picked up a land that my opponent had put down and played it on my field.
It's not like that at all. The rules for Magic don't give you permission to pick up a land that your opponent had put down.
The rules for 8th Edition just tell you that you can re-roll a die. There is no specification that you can only re-roll your dice. Plenty of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Also, as has been mentioned, it's common English usage (in America at least) that you can re-something without having been the one to something in the first place. You can rebuild a wall that someone else built and knocked down, etc, etc. While I do believe it was the author's intent to only allow re-rolls for a player's own dice, the author never actually wrote that you can only re-roll your own dice. There should never be implied rules. Instead of being told we can re-roll "a die", we should have been told we can re-roll "one of your dice". That would have been far less ambiguous.
Keep in mind that 12 months from now the book will still be written the same way and some new player who is not looking through every twitch recording for the last year needs to be able to get that clarification. Until GW posts is in a way that every person who plays can reasonably see the ruling there is no ruling.
no.... This is such a stretch of RAW that EVERYONE realizes that any hint that you could do this is an oversight and an attempt at semantic surgery on the rules text to an extreme level. No new players are going assume you can do this, and if they do, ANY other players will address it quickly.
It's like if I was playing a game of magic, and when it was my turn to play a land, I went and picked up a land that my opponent had put down and played it on my field.
It's not like that at all. The rules for Magic don't give you permission to pick up a land that your opponent had put down.
The rules for 8th Edition just tell you that you can re-roll a die. There is no specification that you can only re-roll your dice. Plenty of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Also, as has been mentioned, it's common English usage (in America at least) that you can re-something without having been the one to something in the first place. You can rebuild a wall that someone else built and knocked down, etc, etc. While I do believe it was the author's intent to only allow re-rolls for a player's own dice, the author never actually wrote that you can only re-roll your own dice. There should never be implied rules. Instead of being told we can re-roll "a die", we should have been told we can re-roll "one of your dice". That would have been far less ambiguous.
Or it should have been spelled out in the rerolls side bar. "Each dice can only be rerolled once. A player may never force a reroll on an opponents rolls." That one sentence would have clarified it all.
mhalko1 wrote: NO YOU AREN'T! you are definitely not going to pick up MY die with the "reroll" you aren't allowed to make. You do not ever get to make the roll for someone else why would this be any different certain abilities say they force your opponent to reroll but you do not get to reroll anything of mine.
Citation needed. Can you quote the page and paragraph telling us that we can't re-roll another player's die result? I realize the rules are new, but I have yet to see that restriction. I see only a general permission to re-roll a die. That's a pretty broad permission.
mhalko1 wrote: NO YOU AREN'T! you are definitely not going to pick up MY die with the "reroll" you aren't allowed to make. You do not ever get to make the roll for someone else why would this be any different certain abilities say they force your opponent to reroll but you do not get to reroll anything of mine.
Citation needed. Can you quote the page and paragraph telling us that we can't re-roll another player's die result? I realize the rules are new, but I have yet to see that restriction. I see only a general permission to re-roll a die. That's a pretty broad permission.
mhalko1 wrote: NO YOU AREN'T! you are definitely not going to pick up MY die with the "reroll" you aren't allowed to make. You do not ever get to make the roll for someone else why would this be any different certain abilities say they force your opponent to reroll but you do not get to reroll anything of mine.
Citation needed. Can you quote the page and paragraph telling us that we can't re-roll another player's die result? I realize the rules are new, but I have yet to see that restriction. I see only a general permission to re-roll a die. That's a pretty broad permission.
[MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - Alpharius]
You're just full of personal attacks. Given that your only contribution is a personal attack, can I safely assume that you don't actually have any rules text to back up your position?
Kriswall brings up a very good point, as the voice of reason this thread needs.
Hate to derail the thread, but can the command re-roll be used in a situation where a neutral die is cast. Obviously you cannot use it before the game, but say there is a roll of some sort that doesn't 'belong' to any plater, say to see if the game continues, can I re-roll that?
Lets say we as players are drawing from the same dice pool, or you borrow one of my dice for something, can I THEN use my re-roll on a die that I own? It's my dice, sure you rolled it but it is still mine.
You're just full of personal attacks. Given that your only contribution is a personal attack, can I safely assume that you don't actually have any rules text to back up your position?
I believe the intent of the rule is that you can only reroll your own rolls, and that is how I plan to play, if nothing else than to avoid arguments.
That being said, looking at it by sheer raw, I can't find anything stopping you from rerolling an opponent's roll, and their die certainly fits under the category "any die."
Maybe it's because I've played a lot of games that involve messing with your opponent's strategy, but I just assumed because it said reroll any die that it could be an opponent's roll. It's not like I thought to myself, "How am I going to win at all costs and also get to touch my opponent's stuff, hahahah". No one is going to reach across the table and grab your die and reroll it. I don't think it's game-changing, every time that stratagem is used it's going to be for an important die roll, regardless of who is making it, and with a detachment that gives you +9 CP you're going to be using them during your opponent's turn. Anyways, if we're going to apply it to only rolls that you make can be rerolled, it does get into some funky areas with the missions when rolls are made, for example:
So now the game roll can be rerolled and possibly extended or cut short by only one player on turn 6, and only by the other player on turn 7? Strange.
Edit: As I've been thinking about this much of the day while following this thread, I'm beginning to feel defeated about presenting the idea that it could be a valid opinion for someone to think any die being rerolled can be applied to a roll made by either player. I might as well present the idea that since a die can never be rerolled more than once, and this isn't per turn or per game, then after rolling each die you own twice you have to throw it away and open up a new box of dice. Like a condom, you only get two attempts per die before you can't use it any more, as it has now been rolled and rerolled once.
gummyofallbears wrote: Kriswall brings up a very good point, as the voice of reason this thread needs.
Hate to derail the thread, but can the command re-roll be used in a situation where a neutral die is cast. Obviously you cannot use it before the game, but say there is a roll of some sort that doesn't 'belong' to any plater, say to see if the game continues, can I re-roll that?
Lets say we as players are drawing from the same dice pool, or you borrow one of my dice for something, can I THEN use my re-roll on a die that I own? It's my dice, sure you rolled it but it is still mine.
Arguments about re-rolling other people's dice aside, the rolls to see if the game continues past turn 5 don't appear to be "neutral". The rules are clear about who makes them. This player can presumably use a CP to re-roll. It seems to be uncontroversial that you can use CP to re-roll the pre-game dice, and this doesn't seem much different.
gummyofallbears wrote: Kriswall brings up a very good point, as the voice of reason this thread needs.
Hate to derail the thread, but can the command re-roll be used in a situation where a neutral die is cast. Obviously you cannot use it before the game, but say there is a roll of some sort that doesn't 'belong' to any plater, say to see if the game continues, can I re-roll that?
Lets say we as players are drawing from the same dice pool, or you borrow one of my dice for something, can I THEN use my re-roll on a die that I own? It's my dice, sure you rolled it but it is still mine.
Arguments about re-rolling other people's dice aside, the rolls to see if the game continues past turn 5 don't appear to be "neutral". The rules are clear about who makes them. This player can presumably use a CP to re-roll. It seems to be uncontroversial that you can use CP to re-roll the pre-game dice, and this doesn't seem much different.
You can? I just assumed that because it has to be on your turn you cannot.
Edit: As I've been thinking about this much of the day while following this thread, I'm beginning to feel defeated about presenting the idea that it could be a valid opinion for someone to think any die being rerolled can be applied to a roll made by either player. I might as well present the idea that since a die can never be rerolled more than once, and this isn't per turn or per game, then after rolling each die you own twice you have to throw it away and open up a new box of dice. Like a condom, you only get two attempts per die before you can't use it any more, as it has now been rolled and rerolled once.
I think it's perfectly understandable that someone who plays games broadly and not just past editions of 40k would conclude that you're allowed to re-roll your opponent's dice. I suspect that if you just took people who had never heard of 40k and dumped them on a desert island with the rulebook and a bunch of models, when you came back they'd actually have a consensus position that re-rolling other people's dice is allowed. It's not a crazy idea to design a game to work that way. It's just that I think it strikes people who have played past editions as such a break from tradition that surely the break would have been stated explicitly if it were intended.
But yes, you could also take this so literally that you think it's telling you to throw out your dice after using them twice. There's a case that this is RAW, in some sense. But of course nobody's going to do that. That'd be a dumb rule, and it doesn't even confer an advantage on anybody so nobody has an incentive to pretend they think it's intended. Edit: For a less crazy example - the RAW don't actually seem to allow you to roll saves for a bunch of identical 1W models all at once, but in almost no situation is anyone going to object to you doing this.
You can? I just assumed that because it has to be on your turn you cannot.
The "Command Points" section of the main rules is explicit on this. Page 242: "You can spend Command Points to use a Strategem before or during a battle." I've seen people taking it for granted you could use this to try to seize the initiative in other threads.
This debate reminds me of my trip back to china where I noticed that a 3rd story floor with children playing on it had no railings. I asked why there were no railings, because wouldn't it be a safety hazard? Surely the kids would be falling off the side.
My uncle told me "The kids here are not that stupid. They know not to go near the edge or rough-house up there".
Meanwhile I go grocery shopping here and the peanut butter is labeled "may contain peanuts".
Meanwhile I go grocery shopping here and the peanut butter is labeled "may contain peanuts".
On the bright side, playing 8th edition will prepare us for when food products must be prepared more than 9' from any enemy peanuts and peanuts may never be allowed within 1' of our opponents (other humans).
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: This debate reminds me of my trip back to china where I noticed that a 3rd story floor with children playing on it had no railings. I asked why there were no railings, because wouldn't it be a safety hazard? Surely the kids would be falling off the side.
My uncle told me "The kids here are not that stupid. They know not to go near the edge or rough-house up there".
Meanwhile I go grocery shopping here and the peanut butter is labeled "may contain peanuts".
That has nothing to do with stupidity. Americans sue at the drop of a hat. Sometimes a company will label their peanut butter as "may contain peanuts" to stave off any lawsuits where a parent claims they weren't warned about peanut content ...or, maybe there are rules that any food product that contains peanuts must be labelled as such to protect people with allergies. You know, like the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2006.
But please, be condescending and assume everyone is too stupid to realize peanut butter has peanuts in it.
There are tons of games where you routinely re-roll an opponent's dice. I'm unclear as to why not re-rolling an opponent's die is some sort of sacred, written in stone 40k thing. It's definitely not a general gaming convention.
Kriswall wrote: There are tons of games where you routinely re-roll an opponent's dice. I'm unclear as to why not re-rolling an opponent's die is some sort of sacred, written in stone 40k thing. It's definitely not a general gaming convention.
The reason is because at least in 40K, whenever you've been able to make an opponent re-roll dice it says as much: that your opponent has to re-roll their hits or that you can force your opponent to re-roll a die, etc. There's never been anything that would allow you to pick up your opponent's die and re-roll it for them.
So while I agree this should be FAQ'd, as it is currently written I'd place a pretty big wager on the answer ending up being that you're only able to re-roll your own dice. Plus, if you take a step back and think of what the command points aare supposed to represent and the bonuses they offer the player, they're all about representing how you, as the commander, are able to influence your own troops. So using that to re-roll an opponent's roll just doesn't fit that concept.
mhalko1 wrote: NO YOU AREN'T! you are definitely not going to pick up MY die with the "reroll" you aren't allowed to make. You do not ever get to make the roll for someone else why would this be any different certain abilities say they force your opponent to reroll but you do not get to reroll anything of mine.
Citation needed. Can you quote the page and paragraph telling us that we can't re-roll another player's die result? I realize the rules are new, but I have yet to see that restriction. I see only a general permission to re-roll a die. That's a pretty broad permission.
Its cited in the picture on page 1. Until you can find a rule that says You = Your Opponent, then the rule is clear.
Kriswall wrote: There are tons of games where you routinely re-roll an opponent's dice. I'm unclear as to why not re-rolling an opponent's die is some sort of sacred, written in stone 40k thing. It's definitely not a general gaming convention.
The reason is because at least in 40K, whenever you've been able to make an opponent re-roll dice it says as much: that your opponent has to re-roll their hits or that you can force your opponent to re-roll a die, etc. There's never been anything that would allow you to pick up your opponent's die and re-roll it for them.
So while I agree this should be FAQ'd, as it is currently written I'd place a pretty big wager on the answer ending up being that you're only able to re-roll your own dice. Plus, if you take a step back and think of what the command points aare supposed to represent and the bonuses they offer the player, they're all about representing how you, as the commander, are able to influence your own troops. So using that to re-roll an opponent's roll just doesn't fit that concept.
I understand. I also tend to agree that the outcome will be that you can only re-roll your own dice. I just don't think "because that's how older versions of the game worked" is a good enough reason. This edition is basically a full rewrite and allows lots of things that never would have been allowed before.
I do disagree that forcing an opponent to re-roll can't represent a 'command point decision'. My opponent shoots a lascannon at my hero guy. He rolls a 6 to hit. I, as army commander, yell at my dude to 'duck and cover', burning a command point and asking my opponent to re-roll that hit (because I'm polite and some people are weird about you touching their dice). He re-rolls and gets a 2, missing. My command decision to try to be harder to hit worked! The issue with abstractions is that anyone creative enough can 'forge the narrative' to be whatever they want. Only the author knows what the command point re-roll is supposed to represent. Maybe I can't tell my guys to be harder to hit, but I can tell them to make better use of their armor (not re-roll the opponent to hit, but yes on re-rolling my armor). Hence, we need an FAQ. Shockingly, GW wrote ambiguous rules.
mhalko1 wrote: NO YOU AREN'T! you are definitely not going to pick up MY die with the "reroll" you aren't allowed to make. You do not ever get to make the roll for someone else why would this be any different certain abilities say they force your opponent to reroll but you do not get to reroll anything of mine.
Citation needed. Can you quote the page and paragraph telling us that we can't re-roll another player's die result? I realize the rules are new, but I have yet to see that restriction. I see only a general permission to re-roll a die. That's a pretty broad permission.
Its cited in the picture on page 1. Until you can find a rule that says You = Your Opponent, then the rule is clear.
As has been mentioned many times, it's common English usage to redo something where you weren't the one who did it in the first place. As such, it's perfectly acceptable to re-roll a die you didn't roll in the first place.
"I was walking down the street and a guy threw a die at me. It landed on the street, rolling several times before landing on the one facing. I picked it up, re-rolled it and got a six. Happy to have improved the result, I kept walking." Nonsense story, but the use of re-rolled isn't inappropriate.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: This debate reminds me of my trip back to china where I noticed that a 3rd story floor with children playing on it had no railings. I asked why there were no railings, because wouldn't it be a safety hazard? Surely the kids would be falling off the side.
My uncle told me "The kids here are not that stupid. They know not to go near the edge or rough-house up there".
Meanwhile I go grocery shopping here and the peanut butter is labeled "may contain peanuts".
That has nothing to do with stupidity. Americans sue at the drop of a hat. Sometimes a company will label their peanut butter as "may contain peanuts" to stave off any lawsuits where a parent claims they weren't warned about peanut content ...or, maybe there are rules that any food product that contains peanuts must be labelled as such to protect people with allergies. You know, like the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2006.
But please, be condescending and assume everyone is too stupid to realize peanut butter has peanuts in it.
There are tons of games where you routinely re-roll an opponent's dice. I'm unclear as to why not re-rolling an opponent's die is some sort of sacred, written in stone 40k thing. It's definitely not a general gaming convention.
I'm just saying that there's something wrong when you have to spell out the obvious to that degree. It frequently makes me think we failed as a society when we have many, many laws in existence specifically to stave off people intentionally doing something against the contrary simply because someone will do it without it spelt out, and another person would be blamed for it.
I'm just surprised this hasn't come up before, since prior edition rulebooks didn't specify dice ownership either. I'd say that before the rolls were always specific to a particular dice (like, say, specifying an enemy's armor save) but Kairos existed back then too and no one seemed to have a problem with him.
Also just for the record, while I believe RAI the writers intended for it to only be your own dice, I do like the idea that you can screw your opponent's rolls. It adds another layer of tactical depth, and it's not that far of a stretch either (if your commander can order a trooper to fire more accurately on the To Hit dice, why can't he order a reroll of an armor save and have that represent the trooper being ordered specifically to aim for the soft bits in between armor plates?)
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: This debate reminds me of my trip back to china where I noticed that a 3rd story floor with children playing on it had no railings. I asked why there were no railings, because wouldn't it be a safety hazard? Surely the kids would be falling off the side.
My uncle told me "The kids here are not that stupid. They know not to go near the edge or rough-house up there".
Meanwhile I go grocery shopping here and the peanut butter is labeled "may contain peanuts".
That has nothing to do with stupidity. Americans sue at the drop of a hat. Sometimes a company will label their peanut butter as "may contain peanuts" to stave off any lawsuits where a parent claims they weren't warned about peanut content ...or, maybe there are rules that any food product that contains peanuts must be labelled as such to protect people with allergies. You know, like the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2006.
But please, be condescending and assume everyone is too stupid to realize peanut butter has peanuts in it.
There are tons of games where you routinely re-roll an opponent's dice. I'm unclear as to why not re-rolling an opponent's die is some sort of sacred, written in stone 40k thing. It's definitely not a general gaming convention.
I'm just saying that there's something wrong when you have to spell out the obvious to that degree. It frequently makes me think we failed as a society when we have many, many laws in existence specifically to stave off people intentionally doing something against the contrary simply because someone will do it without it spelt out, and another person would be blamed for it.
I'm just surprised this hasn't come up before, since prior edition rulebooks didn't specify dice ownership either. I'd say that before the rolls were always specific to a particular dice (like, say, specifying an enemy's armor save) but Kairos existed back then too and no one seemed to have a problem with him.
Also just for the record, while I believe RAI the writers intended for it to only be your own dice, I do like the idea that you can screw your opponent's rolls. It adds another layer of tactical depth, and it's not that far of a stretch either (if your commander can order a trooper to fire more accurately on the To Hit dice, why can't he order a reroll of an armor save and have that represent the trooper being ordered specifically to aim for the soft bits in between armor plates?)
Plus, TONS of other games allow you to reroll an opponent's dice. It's on of the core concepts of Star Wars Destiny. People who didn't grow up playing games where you can't re-roll an opponent's dice won't necessarily assume it to be true. In that sense, it's not even remotely obvious to many people. It really needs to be spelled out. As a rules writer you can't rely on "things that people really ought to know".
Eh depends on which games you've played. Admittedly most of the ones I played are more "pedestrian" than others, but generally they only let you reroll your own rolls. It's very rare for me to encounter a game where they would let you reroll an opponent's dice without explicitly stating so (and in those cases you're only allowed to touch an opponent's dice, not your own).
Granted, all of those explicitly state which dice you can roll. This is the first case where I've seen where the rules never explicitly stated that you can't touch the opponent's dice while also giving a blank "reroll" ability.
Note that this is also the first case I can think of where there is no restriction on using your opponent's stuff, but it wasn't explicitly spelled out so. In other examples, usually they would include an example where you took something from your opponent to explicitly show that was the intent. This isn't the first time I've seen something like this though. Once playing yugioh I had an opponent equip a trample-giving card to one of my monsters. It wasn't until it came to my battlephase that I realized my monster was forced to attack and, due to the wording on the trample card, it ended up inflicting damage to ME (the wording on the card says "inflict the difference as battle damage to your opponent". However the card granting the effect wasn't under my control, hence I was the "opponent" even though the monster belonged to me).
tneva82 wrote: Heh. Another case of fail from gw rulewriters of inability to write clear rules. 12 pages and still rules full of ones that make raw vs rai arquments.
Only real change gw has had is they hired fb guy
It doesn't matter if they make mistakes (we are humans after all) what matter is that they fix them and they have shown in the recent past that they are actively working on answering question and fixing mistakes
Honestly since the rules haven't even officially dropped yet, i would be surprised if there was as day one FAQ if not within the very first week (which they have done for their recent rule releases)
On the same note, the rules states that you cannot reroll any dice more than once (pag 178, upper left). It also does not specifies "during the current game", so i should assume that i cannon EVER-FOREVER reroll an individual dice more than once.
Let's say i have 3 dice: X red, X white and X black.
As per RAW i can only re-roll my X white dice once, my X black dice once and my X red dice once.
After that i'd better buy another 3, called Y white, Y black and Y red. Because X dices cannot be rerolled ANYMORE in any given game until i die.
Do you guys think we need a faq for this too, or maybe, just maybe, warhammer has become the standard hobby for lawyers?
The answer to OP is "No". And i totally get that in other games a "Yes" would be perfectly logical. In warhammer it is not.
Neferhet wrote: On the same note, the rules states that you cannot reroll any dice more than once (pag 178, upper left). It also does not specifies "during the current game", so i should assume that i cannon EVER-FOREVER reroll an individual dice more than once.
Let's say i have 3 dice: X red, X white and X black.
As per RAW i can only re-roll my X white dice once, my X black dice once and my X red dice once.
After that i'd better buy another 3, called Y white, Y black and Y red. Because X dices cannot be rerolled ANYMORE in any given game until i die.
Do you guys think we need a faq for this too, or maybe, just maybe, warhammer has become the standard hobby for lawyers?
The answer to OP is "No". And i totally get that in other games a "Yes" would be perfectly logical. In warhammer it is not.
This is such a weird post. You come out and admit at the end that, actually, yeah, this is a totally plausible gameplay mechanic and if the rulebook said "Schmarhammer 40k" on the front then maybe it would even be the right reading of the rules, but right up until then you're straw-manning it as an utterly preposterous reading that nobody could possibly think was intended. So I'm not sure how to respond because you've already managed to refute your own post quite effectively, but to make the connection explicit: not everyone is going to have your complex and nuanced understanding of the traditions and history of Warhammer 40k that enables them to find a prohibition on re-rolling your opponent's dice in the penumbras and emanations of this and past rulebooks. It is completely plausible that if a group of people decided to start learning this game, they would eventually come to the conclusion that re-rolling an opponent's dice is not just RAW legal but is actually intended.
But, yes, apparently this has become the standard hobby for lawyers. In this thread alone we've had several people bizarrely arguing that it is definitionally impossible to re-roll a die that you yourself did not roll originally, contrary to extremely common English usage. There's lots of very weird "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'again' is". And now you're coming in saying that not only is the plain reading of the rules, which you admit only allows something that is a perfectly plausible sort of gameplay mechanic and would be the right reading for many other games, wrong, it's so obviously wrong that it does not even need clarification. You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.
You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.
Yes, your honour. I will relax. But remember that maximalist case questions begets maximalist case answers.
Anyway it's the old RAI vs RAW.
Should GW learn to write proper rules? Yes, they should.
Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please.
Otherwise, seriously, any singular dice can be re rolled just once in a lifetime. And all our Peanut Butter jars should really be labeled "may contain peanut".
You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.
Yes, your honour. I will relax. But remember that maximalist case questions begets maximalist case answers.
Anyway it's the old RAI vs RAW.
Should GW learn to write proper rules? Yes, they should.
Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please.
Otherwise, seriously, any singular dice can be re rolled just once in a lifetime. And all our Peanut Butter jars should really be labeled "may contain peanut".
"Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please."
What does this even mean? The rules should be pretty tight. If they give us a general permission to re-roll a die, but don't expressly prevent us from re-rolling an opponent's die, we should assume that we can re-roll an opponent's die. There shouldn't be any unwritten assumptions about what we can and can't do. How would a new player, who has never played any prior edition of Warhammer 40k, know that he or she can't re-roll an opponent's die? If that's the author's intent, it needs to be spelled out, unambiguously in the rules. It doesn't appear to be in this case.
You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.
Yes, your honour. I will relax. But remember that maximalist case questions begets maximalist case answers.
Anyway it's the old RAI vs RAW.
Should GW learn to write proper rules? Yes, they should.
Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please.
Otherwise, seriously, any singular dice can be re rolled just once in a lifetime. And all our Peanut Butter jars should really be labeled "may contain peanut".
"Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please."
What does this even mean? The rules should be pretty tight. If they give us a general permission to re-roll a die, but don't expressly prevent us from re-rolling an opponent's die, we should assume that we can re-roll an opponent's die. There shouldn't be any unwritten assumptions about what we can and can't do. How would a new player, who has never played any prior edition of Warhammer 40k, know that he or she can't re-roll an opponent's die? If that's the author's intent, it needs to be spelled out, unambiguously in the rules. It doesn't appear to be in this case.
Yes but you do not ever Re-roll an opponents die. No game allows this. You can force your opponent to reroll...successful saves etc. But you aren't the one who rerolls it therefore you cannot use a CP to reroll an opponents dice roll
You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.
Yes, your honour. I will relax. But remember that maximalist case questions begets maximalist case answers.
Anyway it's the old RAI vs RAW.
Should GW learn to write proper rules? Yes, they should.
Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please.
Otherwise, seriously, any singular dice can be re rolled just once in a lifetime. And all our Peanut Butter jars should really be labeled "may contain peanut".
"Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please."
What does this even mean? The rules should be pretty tight. If they give us a general permission to re-roll a die, but don't expressly prevent us from re-rolling an opponent's die, we should assume that we can re-roll an opponent's die. There shouldn't be any unwritten assumptions about what we can and can't do. How would a new player, who has never played any prior edition of Warhammer 40k, know that he or she can't re-roll an opponent's die? If that's the author's intent, it needs to be spelled out, unambiguously in the rules. It doesn't appear to be in this case.
Yes but you do not ever Re-roll an opponents die. No game allows this. You can force your opponent to reroll...successful saves etc. But you aren't the one who rerolls it therefore you cannot use a CP to reroll an opponents dice roll
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false. Historically, Warhammer 40k hasn't allowed it, but this is a new edition, so "how we always done things" isn't a great reason for anything. Off the top of my head, Star Wars Destiny is a current game where game effects allow you to pick up an opponent's die and re-roll it. Common courtesy dictates that you ask your opponent to re-roll his own die, but the rules allow you to.
Kriswall wrote: Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.
Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.
Kriswall wrote: Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.
Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.
I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.
At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.
If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.
Kriswall wrote: Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.
Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.
I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.
At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.
If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.
How does SW Destiny make clear that it includes your opponent's dice? Does it say so, or has it been an assumption?
Kriswall wrote: Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.
Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.
I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.
At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.
If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.
How does SW Destiny make clear that it includes your opponent's dice? Does it say so, or has it been an assumption?
It is definitely not an assumption. The rules are freely available on the manufacturer's website should you wish to have specifics. To paraphrase, the game uses "your die" or "an opponent's die" when it matters and "a die" when you can pick either.
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false. Historically, Warhammer 40k hasn't allowed it, but this is a new edition, so "how we always done things" isn't a great reason for anything. Off the top of my head, Star Wars Destiny is a current game where game effects allow you to pick up an opponent's die and re-roll it. Common courtesy dictates that you ask your opponent to re-roll his own die, but the rules allow you to.
That is not what your claiming. Your claiming that you can reach over and physically pick up the opponents die roll and roll it yourself, taking that result. Again, "you can reroll" requires "you" to be part of the process.
Kriswall wrote: Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.
Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.
I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.
At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.
If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.
How does SW Destiny make clear that it includes your opponent's dice? Does it say so, or has it been an assumption?
It is definitely not an assumption. The rules are freely available on the manufacturer's website should you wish to have specifics. To paraphrase, the game uses "your die" or "an opponent's die" when it matters and "a die" when you can pick either.
So, basically they do specifically differentiate in their rules between rerolling your own die and rerolling opponent's dice,or "a" die for it being either side. Since GW hasn't worded it that way, why would you assume it would be the same as a game where they have made this differentiation? Esepcially, as Fragile points out, "you" don't normally get to reach over and roll opponent's dice. "You" don't get to reroll dice "you" don't get to roll the first time - that's never specified in the GW rules as being allowed.
Kriswall wrote: Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.
Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.
I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.
At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.
If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.
How does SW Destiny make clear that it includes your opponent's dice? Does it say so, or has it been an assumption?
It is definitely not an assumption. The rules are freely available on the manufacturer's website should you wish to have specifics. To paraphrase, the game uses "your die" or "an opponent's die" when it matters and "a die" when you can pick either.
So, basically they do specifically differentiate in their rules between rerolling your own die and rerolling opponent's dice,or "a" die for it being either side. Since GW hasn't worded it that way, why would you assume it would be the same as a game where they have made this differentiation? Esepcially, as Fragile points out, "you" don't normally get to reach over and roll opponent's dice. "You" don't get to reroll dice "you" don't get to roll the first time - that's never specified in the GW rules as being allowed.
Legitimately asking... if GW doesn't specify, why do you assume "a die" only covers the subset of "your dice"? Why doesn't "a die" include all dice? Confirmation bias?
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false. Historically, Warhammer 40k hasn't allowed it, but this is a new edition, so "how we always done things" isn't a great reason for anything. Off the top of my head, Star Wars Destiny is a current game where game effects allow you to pick up an opponent's die and re-roll it. Common courtesy dictates that you ask your opponent to re-roll his own die, but the rules allow you to.
That is not what your claiming. Your claiming that you can reach over and physically pick up the opponents die roll and roll it yourself, taking that result. Again, "you can reroll" requires "you" to be part of the process.
In Destiny, you can literally reach over and physically pick up the opponent's die and re-roll it yourself, creating a new result. I think most people ask the opponent to re-roll the die out of common courtesy and a commonly held gamer belief that it's impolite to touch another gamer's stuff.
Not specifically about dice rerolling, but in MTG it's assumed that unless it says "your (item)" or "opponent's (item)", you're free to choose whichever one as long as it fulfills the rest of the requirements (such as "destroy target land". You are totally free to destroy either an opponent's land or your own, if doing so would be beneficial) so I can see how some people can be acclimated to it.
Still though GW's dice rolls have traditionally been assigned ownership and outside of Kairos's ability, I don't think there were any instances where you could reroll an opponent's dice without explicit permission due to the way it was written (they always specified specific dice rolls, like Armor Saves or To Hit rolls of certain models, which did have ownership. You couldn't use Guide or something similar to force your opponent's units to reroll To Hit since you couldn't even target them with the effect).
Legitimately asking... if GW doesn't specify, why do you assume "a die" only covers the subset of "your dice"? Why doesn't "a die" include all dice? Confirmation bias?
More specifically, why would "Reroll any one dice" (the actual wording in the rule) exclude any of the dice?
So, basically they do specifically differentiate in their rules between rerolling your own die and rerolling opponent's dice,or "a" die for it being either side. Since GW hasn't worded it that way, why would you assume it would be the same as a game where they have made this differentiation? Esepcially, as Fragile points out, "you" don't normally get to reach over and roll opponent's dice. "You" don't get to reroll dice "you" don't get to roll the first time - that's never specified in the GW rules as being allowed.
I just glanced at the Destiny rules and I actually don't see any discussion of re-rolls, though I may have missed it. The rules are extremely brief and it seems like mostly they expect you to just follow card text. Some cards say that you can re-roll "a die" or similar. Apparently people play that as you can re-roll an opponent's dice.
Regardless, this whole tangent seems pretty silly. I am not sure what point you're driving at. Like, let's stipulate that while maybe there are other games that let you re-roll other people's dice all of them say explicitly in their rules that you're allowed to re-roll other people's dice. So? I think that mostly everyone agrees that it is very unlikely that GW intends for players to re-roll other players' dice. The position of the people you're trying to disagree with is, by and large I think, that by the RAW it's clearly legal to re-roll your opponent's dice and that some not-vanishingly-small number of (perhaps mostly new) players will not correctly divine the intent of the rules such that a clarification would be useful. I mean, I just think that when we're at the point where you're arguing about whether other games are explicit about their allowance of this mechanic that everyone's conceded isn't a crazy one, or whether there's some fundamental difference between you re-rolling your opponent's dice and you allowing your opponent to re-roll his dice that you're technically allowed to re-roll yourself, you've given the game away. Right? If it is reasonably possible for players to come to 40k without some really firm expectation that they can never re-roll their opponent's dice, it's worth clarifying if the rules were not supposed to actually allow it.
So, basically they do specifically differentiate in their rules between rerolling your own die and rerolling opponent's dice,or "a" die for it being either side. Since GW hasn't worded it that way, why would you assume it would be the same as a game where they have made this differentiation? Esepcially, as Fragile points out, "you" don't normally get to reach over and roll opponent's dice. "You" don't get to reroll dice "you" don't get to roll the first time - that's never specified in the GW rules as being allowed.
I just glanced at the Destiny rules and I actually don't see any discussion of re-rolls, though I may have missed it. The rules are extremely brief and it seems like mostly they expect you to just follow card text. Some cards say that you can re-roll "a die" or similar. Apparently people play that as you can re-roll an opponent's dice.
Regardless, this whole tangent seems pretty silly. I am not sure what point you're driving at. Like, let's stipulate that while maybe there are other games that let you re-roll other people's dice all of them say explicitly in their rules that you're allowed to re-roll other people's dice. So? I think that mostly everyone agrees that it is very unlikely that GW intends for players to re-roll other players' dice. The position of the people you're trying to disagree with is, by and large I think, that by the RAW it's clearly legal to re-roll your opponent's dice and that some not-vanishingly-small number of (perhaps mostly new) players will not correctly divine the intent of the rules such that a clarification would be useful. I mean, I just think that when we're at the point where you're arguing about whether other games are explicit about their allowance of this mechanic that everyone's conceded isn't a crazy one, or whether there's some fundamental difference between you re-rolling your opponent's dice and you allowing your opponent to re-roll his dice that you're technically allowed to re-roll yourself, you've given the game away. Right? If it is reasonably possible for players to come to 40k without some really firm expectation that they can never re-roll their opponent's dice, it's worth clarifying if the rules were not supposed to actually allow it.
Right. If GW's wants us to only be able to re-roll our own dice, they need to say so explicitly. It's as simple as that. This can be cleared up with a simple FAQ. "Q: Can such and such command point ability let me re-roll an opponent's die? A: No". Or yes. Whatever they say. My money is on no.
Legitimately asking... if GW doesn't specify, why do you assume "a die" only covers the subset of "your dice"? Why doesn't "a die" include all dice? Confirmation bias?
Because you don't roll opponent's dice, only your own, and you don't reroll dice you haven't rolled in the first place. You'd need to specify you getting to roll or reroll opponent's dice, which the rules do not do.
In Destiny, you can literally reach over and physically pick up the opponent's die and re-roll it yourself, creating a new result. I think most people ask the opponent to re-roll the die out of common courtesy and a commonly held gamer belief that it's impolite to touch another gamer's stuff.
Because their rules specifically indicate when you can roll oppoent's dice. Unlike 40k.
Legitimately asking... if GW doesn't specify, why do you assume "a die" only covers the subset of "your dice"? Why doesn't "a die" include all dice? Confirmation bias?
Because you don't roll opponent's dice, only your own, and you don't reroll dice you haven't rolled in the first place. You'd need to specify you getting to roll or reroll opponent's dice, which the rules do not do.
In Destiny, you can literally reach over and physically pick up the opponent's die and re-roll it yourself, creating a new result. I think most people ask the opponent to re-roll the die out of common courtesy and a commonly held gamer belief that it's impolite to touch another gamer's stuff.
Because their rules specifically indicate when you can roll oppoent's dice. Unlike 40k.
Your first point is tenuous at best. Common English usage allows you to redo something you didn't do in the first place. You can rebuild a house you didn't initially build. You can refill a glass for a friend despite not being the one to fill it the first time. You can reroll a die somebody else rolled the first time.
Then again, I guess when the argument comes down to basic language comprehension, nobody wins. We need to wait for an FAQ, which I fully expect will tell us we can only reroll our own dice. I just don't think GW will ever be good at writing unambiguous rules.
RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."
Alcibiades wrote: RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."
I think for the sake of RAI good sportsmanship there will be a resounding lack of anything but re-rolling one's own d6
Alcibiades wrote: RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."
I think for the sake of RAI good sportsmanship there will be a resounding lack of anything but re-rolling one's own d6
Alcibiades wrote: RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."
I think for the sake of RAI good sportsmanship there will be a resounding lack of anything but re-rolling one's own d6
I think you're completely correct!
I'm just not convinced that it's RAI. We need the authors to opine. As mentioned several times, rolling an opponent's die is definitely a thing that happens in games these days. It's nowhere near a universal gaming taboo. RAW clearly allows it. This is definitely something that needs to be FAQ'd.
Kriswall wrote: Right. If GW's wants us to only be able to re-roll our own dice, they need to say so explicitly. It's as simple as that. This can be cleared up with a simple FAQ. "Q: Can such and such command point ability let me re-roll an opponent's die? A: No". Or yes. Whatever they say. My money is on no.
Why would they need to make a FAQ when it is already specified in the rerolls rule:
"Re-rolls: Some rules allow YOU to re-roll a dice roll, which means YOU get to roll some or all of the dice again. YOU can never re-roll a dice more than once, and re-rolls happen before any modifiers (if any) are applied."
Capitalized YOU for clarity. Since this rule as a whole refers only to "you" this is a single entity (as in 1 person). As such YOU cannot reroll a dice I rolled.
Kriswall wrote: Right. If GW's wants us to only be able to re-roll our own dice, they need to say so explicitly. It's as simple as that. This can be cleared up with a simple FAQ. "Q: Can such and such command point ability let me re-roll an opponent's die? A: No". Or yes. Whatever they say. My money is on no.
Why would they need to make a FAQ when it is already specified in the rerolls rule:
"Re-rolls: Some rules allow YOU to re-roll a dice roll, which means YOU get to roll some or all of the dice again. YOU can never re-roll a dice more than once, and re-rolls happen before any modifiers (if any) are applied."
Capitalized YOU for clarity. Since this rule as a whole refers only to "you" this is a single entity (as in 1 person). As such YOU cannot reroll a dice I rolled.
As has been mentioned multiple times in this thread, it is common English usage to allow a person to RE-whatever something they didn't whatever in the first place. I can rebuild a house that someone else built after a natural disaster damages it. Survey 1000 people and the overwhelming majority would say, "yeah, Kris rebuilt that house". Assuming that a person can re-whatever something they didn't whatever in the first place (again, common English usage), nothing in the above cited rule prevents me from re-rolling an opponent's die after s/he rolled it the first time.
However using your rebuilding a house argument as a rule:
"Rebuilding: Some rules allow YOU to rebuild a house, which means YOU get to build some or all of the house again. YOU can never rebuild a house more than once"
How can you claim that you can rebuild your opponents house with that rule? It's not about the RE-whatever, it's about the YOU.
So while it is possible to RE-whatever (English usage, common or not), the fact that it states YOU limits it to YOU doing it and not someone else. If for some reason common English usage allows someone else to do something YOU are allowed to do I reckon a lot of students would let someone else redo the exams they failed .
Alcibiades wrote: RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."
RAW none of those dice can be rerolled after one reroll, so once that die has been rolled twice you have to dicard it since it can't be (re)rolled any more.
DutchSage wrote: However using your rebuilding a house argument as a rule:
"Rebuilding: Some rules allow YOU to rebuild a house, which means YOU get to build some or all of the house again. YOU can never rebuild a house more than once"
How can you claim that you can rebuild your opponents house with that rule? It's not about the RE-whatever, it's about the YOU.
So while it is possible to RE-whatever (English usage, common or not), the fact that it states YOU limits it to YOU doing it and not someone else. If for some reason common English usage allows someone else to do something YOU are allowed to do I reckon a lot of students would let someone else redo the exams they failed .
This does not appear to be an actual reply to the person's post. I think you misunderstood something. His position is not just that it is in general possible to re-[verb].
DutchSage wrote: However using your rebuilding a house argument as a rule:
"Rebuilding: Some rules allow YOU to rebuild a house, which means YOU get to build some or all of the house again. YOU can never rebuild a house more than once"
How can you claim that you can rebuild your opponents house with that rule? It's not about the RE-whatever, it's about the YOU.
So while it is possible to RE-whatever (English usage, common or not), the fact that it states YOU limits it to YOU doing it and not someone else. If for some reason common English usage allows someone else to do something YOU are allowed to do I reckon a lot of students would let someone else redo the exams they failed .
"Some rules allow you to rebuild A house, ..."
Why do you interpret "A house" as "YOUR house"? I'm not adding rules here. You are. I'm just saying that my opponent's house is "A house".
DutchSage wrote: However using your rebuilding a house argument as a rule:
"Rebuilding: Some rules allow YOU to rebuild a house, which means YOU get to build some or all of the house again. YOU can never rebuild a house more than once"
How can you claim that you can rebuild your opponents house with that rule? It's not about the RE-whatever, it's about the YOU.
So while it is possible to RE-whatever (English usage, common or not), the fact that it states YOU limits it to YOU doing it and not someone else. If for some reason common English usage allows someone else to do something YOU are allowed to do I reckon a lot of students would let someone else redo the exams they failed .
"Some rules allow you to rebuild A house, ..."
Why do you interpret "A house" as "YOUR house"? I'm not adding rules here. You are. I'm just saying that my opponent's house is "A house".
And also that your opponents house would fall under "Any one house".
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
Automatically Appended Next Post:
davethepak wrote: Really? Someone thinks they can make and opponent re-roll one of their dice?
I will smack them with a trout.
re-roll that.
You got my first exalt!
lol people will believe what they want. I've taken pictures of datasheets or rules and in some cases gotten direct contact with the rules team and shown the result and people literally say "the rules writers are wrong". Meaning you can prove someone wrong with no space for any ambiguity and they will refuse any or all evidence. If fething Duncan came out with a short video on the 40k website saying that "you cannot reroll others player dice with the command stratagem, as per the rules state in the core rules section, also the writing team has told me to tell all of you this just in case you misread, interpreted this wrong or perhaps the wording wasn't clear enough, just to make clear, you cannot do that." These jerks would say, "Well he is wrong! Because I like to intentional construe words and grammar out of its current acceptable meanings to gain a slight edge in a game about having fun with friends".
axisofentropy wrote: GW said on its twitch stream you cannot re-roll your opponent's dice, for what that's worth. yes that's not "official" but hopefully that will make it into an imminent FAQ.
Also, that's pretty official in my book
Automatically Appended Next Post:
davethepak wrote: Really? Someone thinks they can make and opponent re-roll one of their dice?
I will smack them with a trout.
re-roll that.
You got my first exalt!
lol people will believe what they want. I've taken pictures of datasheets or rules and in some cases gotten direct contact with the rules team and shown the result and people literally say "the rules writers are wrong". Meaning you can prove someone wrong with no space for any ambiguity and they will refuse any or all evidence. If fething Duncan came out with a short video on the 40k website saying that "you cannot reroll others player dice with the command stratagem, as per the rules state in the core rules section, also the writing team has told me to tell all of you this just in case you misread, interpreted this wrong or perhaps the wording wasn't clear enough, just to make clear, you cannot do that." These jerks would say, "Well he is wrong! Because I like to intentional construe words and grammar out of its current acceptable meanings to gain a slight edge in a game about having fun with friends".
Actually, I don't think most players argue once GW puts out areal clarification via Errata or FAQ. They said one die. If they come out and say "Oops. We meant "any one of your dice", I'd be happy. The issue is the ambiguity. If Duncan did put out a video, it wouldn't change the fact that the rules are ambiguous. We either need an Errata or FAQ to clarify the ambiguity. Interviews are all well and good, but you kind of need the answers to be in the Erratas/FAQs section of the website if you reasonably want people to be able to find them.
Just to shed some light on this question, as it has come up a lot both here and elsewhere on the internet, it was confirmed by Pete Foley (lead designer) that you cannot use the re-roll strategem to re-roll your opponent's dice rolls, as seen here:
It's still definitely one for the FAQ, though. I don't particularly want to have to carry a print-out of a tweet to prove it when this question inevitably comes up.
Grimdakka wrote: Just to shed some light on this question, as it has come up a lot both here and elsewhere on the internet, it was confirmed by Pete Foley (lead designer) that you cannot use the re-roll strategem to re-roll your opponent's dice rolls, as seen here:
It's still definitely one for the FAQ, though. I don't particularly want to have to carry a print-out of a tweet to prove it when this question inevitably comes up.
Right. It's pretty clear that's the intent, but the rule itself is ambiguous and requires an FAQ. I don't have a Twitter account and am certainly not signing up for one just to chance upon GW rules clarifications.
I'm very pleased it's been answered so quickly. Even without an FAQ, it's an easy ruling for any tournament judge to make so I don't foresee it causing any problems. That does make going first very important, as that player will now have a higher level of control over whether the game goes to a sixth turn depending on their own position.
I am confused by this whole thread
RAW "You can reroll any single dice"
This is specific, there is no ambiguity in the RAW.
Given that there is no ambiguity in the RAW you can reroll "any" dice.
What you could do in previous editions is irrelevant to a ruling on 8th.
Now whether you role the same dice again, your opponent does or you pick up an unused dice all have the same effect (assuming dice arn't weighted) so it shouldn't matter or influence the outcome so if your opponent doesn't Want you touching his dice just use one of yours.
As to RAI that is entirely subjective but also entirely irelevant. When the RAW is crystal clear you follow RAW.
While I am the first to criticise GW for bad rules writing in this instance its clear. Of course GW may later change this if they wish through FAQ or Errata, but until they do the RAW is clear
As to the lead designers comment that is not RAW in the publication. it certainly implies RAI and bad rules writing and may indicate that they will FAQ it but untill they do or ITC/ETC adopt it I won't be following it as I don't need to as the RAW is clear so you can.
U02dah4 wrote: I am confused by this whole thread
RAW "You can reroll any single dice"
This is specific, there is no ambiguity in the RAW.
Given that there is no ambiguity in the RAW you can reroll "any" dice.
What you could do in previous editions is irrelevant to a ruling on 8th.
Now whether you role the same dice again, your opponent does or you pick up an unused dice all have the same effect (assuming dice arn't weighted) so it shouldn't matter or influence the outcome so if your opponent doesn't Want you touching his dice just use one of yours.
As to RAI that is entirely subjective but also entirely irelevant. When the RAW is crystal clear you follow RAW.
While I am the first to criticise GW for bad rules writing in this instance its clear. Of course GW may later change this if they wish through FAQ or Errata, but until they do the RAW is clear
As to the lead designers comment that is not RAW in the publication. it certainly implies RAI and bad rules writing and may indicate that they will FAQ it but untill they do or ITC/ETC adopt it I won't be following it as I don't need to as the RAW is clear so you can.
@krisswall, and there you have it. A literal example of what I just said.
Would this allow you to re-roll one dice from a 2 dice roll like charge distance. I don't remember the exact wording, but that would be a single dice, no? Or are we to interpret that as single dice rolls like running or damage rolls and what have you.
U02dah4 wrote: I am confused by this whole thread
RAW "You can reroll any single dice"
This is specific, there is no ambiguity in the RAW.
Given that there is no ambiguity in the RAW you can reroll "any" dice.
What you could do in previous editions is irrelevant to a ruling on 8th.
Now whether you role the same dice again, your opponent does or you pick up an unused dice all have the same effect (assuming dice arn't weighted) so it shouldn't matter or influence the outcome so if your opponent doesn't Want you touching his dice just use one of yours.
As to RAI that is entirely subjective but also entirely irelevant. When the RAW is crystal clear you follow RAW.
While I am the first to criticise GW for bad rules writing in this instance its clear. Of course GW may later change this if they wish through FAQ or Errata, but until they do the RAW is clear
As to the lead designers comment that is not RAW in the publication. it certainly implies RAI and bad rules writing and may indicate that they will FAQ it but untill they do or ITC/ETC adopt it I won't be following it as I don't need to as the RAW is clear so you can.
@krisswall, and there you have it. A literal example of what I just said.
Not really. Your original story was about someone who looked at murky RAW and refused to say it was Y even when the developer did.
This isn't murky RAW. This is clear. Like crystal clear. Yeah, you can roll someone else's die using that.
Now the twitter shows that while it is RAW for you to do that, it's not RAI. So GW made a boo-boo and I'm sure they'll fix it at the next opportunity. Happens. I've met judges who make bigger ones and then have to explain their orders so it's not exactly uncommon.
I must disagree if you reread my over the top and very exaggerated example, which was if the literal writing team released a video telling you, that this is how it is to be played, be it for whatever reason, people would still contest it and say they will play it their own way. And.... Ta daaaah. Jazz hands*
*See quoted the prior post of man saying, he doesn't care that the lead writer has clarified this rule, he doesn't intend to play it that way.
Tsol wrote: I must disagree if you reread my over the top and very exaggerated example, which was if the literal writing team released a video telling you, that this is how it is to be played, be it for whatever reason, people would still contest it and say they will play it their own way. And.... Ta daaaah. Jazz hands*
*See quoted the prior post of man saying, he doesn't care that the lead writer has clarified this rule, he doesn't intend to play it that way.
I think the point people are making is that no amount of video commentary changes the actual rules as written. If the authors wrote "The sky is green" and then in an interview said "The sky is blue", what they wrote didn't change. If they want to change what they wrote, they can via an errata or they can clarify what they wrote using an FAQ. In this case, it would be appropriate to use an errata since they seem to have wrote something counter to what they intended.
What they actually wrote, i.e. Rules as Written, states that you can re-roll any one die. Without a qualification or restriction, this should include an opponent's die. If the author's intent was to not allow this, they need to correct their rules. The lead writer effectively hasn't clarified the rule. The writers have exactly two official ways to clarify rules... errata or FAQ. Commentary on a video that the majority of the player base will very possibly never see is not on that short list. It's interesting for those who see it, but doesn't count as an official rules change or clarification.
TL DR - Until they issue an errata or FAQ, RAW will continue to allow you to roll an opponent's die. If you and an opponent want to house rule to prevent re-rolling an opponent's die based on commentary from one of the authors until an official errata or FAQ comes out, go for it. If you and an opponent want to play using the rules as written, re-rolling an opponent's die is acceptable.
I'd like to point out that the quote seems to come from a personal twitter account and not a GW account. While the gentleman may be the lead designer he is not the only designer and may or may not even still be employed by GW. Since this is his account then his statements are only his opinion.
Also, like Kriswall I don't have a twitter account and have no way to check the veracity of the tweet. Just because someone else posts a quote (or even a screenshot) doesn't mean it can't have been altered beforehand.
There are instances of other company's designers/writers/employees giving "rulings" on aspects of their games that were shown to be in error/ruled otherwise on official fora. So, until there is an official ruling the issue isn't settled in my mind.
U02dah4 wrote: I am confused by this whole thread
RAW "You can reroll any single dice"
This is specific, there is no ambiguity in the RAW.
Given that there is no ambiguity in the RAW you can reroll "any" dice.
So by RAW you can go over to the Monopoly game the next table over and reroll someone's dice there. Or reroll the dice for a craps game as long as you make the reroll while you're playing a 40k game also.
U02dah4 wrote: I am confused by this whole thread
RAW "You can reroll any single dice"
This is specific, there is no ambiguity in the RAW.
Given that there is no ambiguity in the RAW you can reroll "any" dice.
So by RAW you can go over to the Monopoly game the next table over and reroll someone's dice there. Or reroll the dice for a craps game as long as you make the reroll while you're playing a 40k game also.
I'm pretty sure the rules for all 3 games begin with some kind of statement that "these are the rules for playing X game" so no, you'd be prohibited from doing that by the rules since 40k's rules are, by its own definition, only for 40k. Even if 40k didn't have that disclaimer, I am fairly confident Monopoly and Craps do, so they would prevent you from interfering with their dice even if 40k explicitly allowed you to. Since you're crossing game boundaries you need permission from both sets of rules to act.
since you didn't make the original roll... you can't re-roll it.
Templated wording would be 'You can force your opponent to re-roll any single dice roll'.
This one's done and dusted, IMHO.
Sadly, the English language isn't so precise. Clear arguments have been made in this thread for either case.
RAI has now been clarified by the GW team, but this same ambiguity seems to crop up every edition. GW would benefit from a technical writer, I think.
GW would REALLY benefit from a technical writer.
And yes, the 'You' in question doesn't mean much as the English language readily allows you to re<something> you didn't <something> in the first place.
"I subscribed to White Dwarf last year, but let the subscription lapse. My mom renewed it for me."
"My uncle was devastated when a tornado damaged the house he built by hand. Thankfully, my cousins banded together and rebuilt it."
"Knowing that I wasn't going to drink all the wine tonight, I recorked the bottle."
"My opponent rolled his armor save die and got a 6. I used a command point to re-roll the die and got a 2."
Read those sentences to 1,000 native English speakers. I doubt any of them would say "woah... you can't rebuild a house if you weren't the one to build it in the first place", etc.
TLDR - The semantic argument that you can't re-roll a die you didn't initially roll doesn't hold up.
Q. Can I use the Command Re-roll Stratagem to re-roll
a dice roll made by my opponent?
A. No.
Note that the rules assume that a player always rolls their own
dice (instead of asking their opponent, for example, to roll hit
rolls, saving throws, etc. on their behalf). That being the case,
you can only use the above-mentioned Stratagem to affect dice
rolls you make, and not those made by your opponent
DCannon4Life wrote: Just because someone, somewhere, decides that something is unclear, doesn't mean it's unclear. Nor does it mean that the "question" is being asked "frequently". You may get an FaQ for it (recommend holding your breath) but that hardly means one was necessary.
EDIT: And if you DO get an FaQ, remember that I was right, because I bet a dollar I will be.
DCannon4Life wrote: Just because someone, somewhere, decides that something is unclear, doesn't mean it's unclear. Nor does it mean that the "question" is being asked "frequently". You may get an FaQ for it (recommend holding your breath) but that hardly means one was necessary.
EDIT: And if you DO get an FaQ, remember that I was right, because I bet a dollar I will be.
@Kriswall: I want my dollar.
The only ones that disagreed with you were the neckbeards. And you don't want their dollars with Cheeto crumbs all over it.
.
