Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/15 09:16:20


Post by: Beardedragon


So.. ive been playing for like 2 years or something and it occurred to me during a match with another player that im not entirely sure who decides what saves to make, and who decides WHEN to take them.


So i played a slannesh player and i had to take some wounds, and naturally daemonettes being -4AP or something on a wound roll of 6 (where they normally have -1AP), meant that some had higher AP than others.

He then said that hes the one dictating which AP value attack that i had to make saves for. I feel like this makes sense, as otherwise, bloodletters look rediculous with their damage 1 and damage 2 depending on the wound roll as well, when fighting 2 wound models. If your enemy dictated when to take saves, they would take a damage 1 wound roll, then a damage 2 wound roll after to waste the 2 damage.

But i feel like i gotta ask, is this the correct way to do it? Do the attacker, decide which save rolls the opponent takes first?

And to work on from that, how long can you stretch this?
Heres an example; Scrapjets and Bullgryns with the 4+ invul shields and the other shield giving +1 to the save (or is it +2? who cares).
Scrapjets have 2 ranged weapon types, str 5 and str 8, and when taking saves you have to keep allocating to that model untill he dies or untill the phase is over. Unless he is wounded then it carries over.

Can i then finish all my rokkits and big shoota shots (str 8 and 5 resectively) and then tell my bullgryn user opponent to take a str 5 wound save, which he does, then change over to my rocket shot afterwards, to get a better AP value so he cant take that save on an invul shield (because he has to keep allocating to the first bullgryn)? Or is this idea only working for things like daemonnettes because its the same attack they pull off? And you actually have to finish all the way to the save state when finishing a type of attack? And thus big shootas have to be finished then rokkits have to be finished?

Because i feel like i see people sometimes throwing different AP(str/dmg value attacks in to the tray but they merely use different colors of dies to sort between them.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/15 09:38:45


Post by: DeathReaper


This is covered in the core rules.

Attacks are made 1 at a time.

So the person attacking makes a to hit and to wound roll, and if they succeed with the to hit and to wound roll, then the opponent allocates the wound and rolls a save.

This is covered on page 18 of the PDF rules in the "MAKING ATTACKS" section.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/15 10:32:01


Post by: Beardedragon


 DeathReaper wrote:
This is covered in the core rules.

Attacks are made 1 at a time.

So the person attacking makes a to hit and to wound roll, and if they succeed with the to hit and to wound roll, then the opponent allocates the wound and rolls a save.

This is covered on page 18 of the PDF rules in the "MAKING ATTACKS" section.


Except no one makes a single attack at a time and throws several at a time. Arent there rules for how that works then?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/15 11:45:10


Post by: beast_gts


Beardedragon wrote:
Except no one makes a single attack at a time and throws several at a time. Arent there rules for how that works then?
Yes, page 221 of the Rulebook - you can only fast roll dice that have identical profiles.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/15 14:14:53


Post by: Beardedragon


beast_gts wrote:
Beardedragon wrote:
Except no one makes a single attack at a time and throws several at a time. Arent there rules for how that works then?
Yes, page 221 of the Rulebook - you can only fast roll dice that have identical profiles.



oh i see.

thanks.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/15 15:24:49


Post by: alextroy


The only odd case that exist from Fast Rolling is when an attack is enhanced by a Hit or Wound Roll. There is no guidance as to what happens when your Daemonettes Fast Roll their attacks and you end up with a few AP -4 Wounds amongst the AP -1 Wounds.

For simplicity's sake along with consistency with the rest of the Fast Rolling rules, I would group them two AP values together. To be sporting, I would allow my opponent to decide which group to Save against first.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/15 20:59:37


Post by: Jidmah


 alextroy wrote:
The only odd case that exist from Fast Rolling is when an attack is enhanced by a Hit or Wound Roll. There is no guidance as to what happens when your Daemonettes Fast Roll their attacks and you end up with a few AP -4 Wounds amongst the AP -1 Wounds.

For simplicity's sake along with consistency with the rest of the Fast Rolling rules, I would group them two AP values together. To be sporting, I would allow my opponent to decide which group to Save against first.


Another option is to use a "left to right, top to bottom" or approach. You just toss all the dice and use whatever order they end up with on the table/dice tray.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 01:13:40


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


Since the defender gets to assign where an attack goes in the normal (slow roll) attack sequence, I would say that the defender picks which attack is taken by which model.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 01:43:41


Post by: JNAProductions


I experience this issue with my Plaguebearers (and some other Nurgle Daemons).

On a 6+ to-wound, with a nearby Herald or Prince, they get +1 Damage.
On a 7+ to-wound with Virulent Blessing, they do double damage.

The RAW... You roll each attack (at least the wound roll) one at a time. So the order is randomized.
How I play it, though, is I explain this to my opponent at the start of the match, and just ask them "When there's multiple damage numbers, do you want to take them low-to-high, or high-to-low?" and just stick to it for that game.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 01:52:40


Post by: JakeSiren


@Beardedragon
This is simply a case where it may be inappropriate for your opponent to have fast rolled. If the weapon isn't guaranteed to have the same profile when it comes to making the saving throw, they shouldn't fast roll it. The only exception I would put to this is when the order doesn't matter, eg: all of the defending models save profiles are the same, so it doesn't matter *which* model an AP-1 or AP-4 attack is resolved against, or in the cast of Bloodletters, when having 1 or 2 damage on the attack doesn't have an impact (ie: 1 wound enemies, or single model units).

If your opponent has put the game into an invalid state by fast rolling when it was inappropriate to fast roll, it's reasonable for the defender to resolve the attacks in which ever order they wish. There's no rules to cover when someone breaks the rules.


@Alextroy, wound grouping is a 7th Edition concept. If someone is too impatient to roll properly when it matters, then their opponent should allocate attack order however they see fit. In the case of Bloodletters vs Intercessors, it's entirely reasonable for them to take 1-damage saves first until the first wound, then switch to the 2-damage saves until the Intercessor dies. If the dice were rolled properly, then they would need to resolve the saves in the correct order, but someone fast rolling has thrown out that vital bit of information. Jidmah has a reasonable compromise between the ability to fast roll and the need for resolving attacks in a specific order. Although this only works on the to wound rolls.

This is the #1 reason I hate the 6 to hit/wound changes weapon profile rules - you can't guarantee the ability to fast roll, thus slowing down the game.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 01:58:16


Post by: JNAProductions


JakeSiren wrote:
@Beardedragon
This is simply a case where it may be inappropriate for your opponent to have fast rolled. If the weapon isn't guaranteed to have the same profile when it comes to making the saving throw, they shouldn't fast roll it. The only exception I would put to this is when the order doesn't matter, eg: all of the defending models save profiles are the same, so it doesn't matter *which* model an AP-1 or AP-4 attack is resolved against, or in the cast of Bloodletters, when having 1 or 2 damage on the attack doesn't have an impact (ie: 1 wound enemies, or single model units).

If your opponent has put the game into an invalid state by fast rolling when it was inappropriate to fast roll, it's reasonable for the defender to resolve the attacks in which ever order they wish. There's no rules to cover when someone breaks the rules.


@Alextroy, wound grouping is a 7th Edition concept. If someone is too impatient to roll properly when it matters, then their opponent should allocate attack order however they see fit. In the case of Bloodletters vs Intercessors, it's entirely reasonable for them to take 1-damage saves first until the first wound, then switch to the 2-damage saves until the Intercessor dies. If the dice were rolled properly, then they would need to resolve the saves in the correct order, but someone fast rolling has thrown out that vital bit of information. Jidmah has a reasonable compromise between the ability to fast roll and the need for resolving attacks in a specific order. Although this only works on the to wound rolls.

This is the #1 reason I hate the 6 to hit/wound changes weapon profile rules - you can't guarantee the ability to fast roll, thus slowing down the game.
A squad of 30 Bloodletters has 61 attacks. Do you really want to make people roll 61 attacks individually?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 02:05:05


Post by: JakeSiren


 JNAProductions wrote:
I experience this issue with my Plaguebearers (and some other Nurgle Daemons).

On a 6+ to-wound, with a nearby Herald or Prince, they get +1 Damage.
On a 7+ to-wound with Virulent Blessing, they do double damage.

The RAW... You roll each attack (at least the wound roll) one at a time. So the order is randomized.
How I play it, though, is I explain this to my opponent at the start of the match, and just ask them "When there's multiple damage numbers, do you want to take them low-to-high, or high-to-low?" and just stick to it for that game.
Oh yeah, that's annoying. I always just tell my opponent "resolve them in whatever order you'd like". I don't have time for the noise that is rolling each wound roll, and potentially re-rolling it one at a time. Most people resolve the same damage profile all at once then move onto the next one.

 JNAProductions wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
@Beardedragon
This is simply a case where it may be inappropriate for your opponent to have fast rolled. If the weapon isn't guaranteed to have the same profile when it comes to making the saving throw, they shouldn't fast roll it. The only exception I would put to this is when the order doesn't matter, eg: all of the defending models save profiles are the same, so it doesn't matter *which* model an AP-1 or AP-4 attack is resolved against, or in the cast of Bloodletters, when having 1 or 2 damage on the attack doesn't have an impact (ie: 1 wound enemies, or single model units).

If your opponent has put the game into an invalid state by fast rolling when it was inappropriate to fast roll, it's reasonable for the defender to resolve the attacks in which ever order they wish. There's no rules to cover when someone breaks the rules.


@Alextroy, wound grouping is a 7th Edition concept. If someone is too impatient to roll properly when it matters, then their opponent should allocate attack order however they see fit. In the case of Bloodletters vs Intercessors, it's entirely reasonable for them to take 1-damage saves first until the first wound, then switch to the 2-damage saves until the Intercessor dies. If the dice were rolled properly, then they would need to resolve the saves in the correct order, but someone fast rolling has thrown out that vital bit of information. Jidmah has a reasonable compromise between the ability to fast roll and the need for resolving attacks in a specific order. Although this only works on the to wound rolls.

This is the #1 reason I hate the 6 to hit/wound changes weapon profile rules - you can't guarantee the ability to fast roll, thus slowing down the game.
A squad of 30 Bloodletters has 61 attacks. Do you really want to make people roll 61 attacks individually?
No, but the game doesn't provide a clean way of fast-rolling it. You have to rely on hacks to keep the speed going and to keep things relatively fair. You either roll it correctly (one at a time when it matters), or you don't. I think most people settle with rolling it incorrectly.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 03:38:23


Post by: alextroy


JakeSiren wrote:
@Alextroy, wound grouping is a 7th Edition concept. If someone is too impatient to roll properly when it matters, then their opponent should allocate attack order however they see fit. In the case of Bloodletters vs Intercessors, it's entirely reasonable for them to take 1-damage saves first until the first wound, then switch to the 2-damage saves until the Intercessor dies. If the dice were rolled properly, then they would need to resolve the saves in the correct order, but someone fast rolling has thrown out that vital bit of information. Jidmah has a reasonable compromise between the ability to fast roll and the need for resolving attacks in a specific order. Although this only works on the to wound rolls.
Agreeing to a simple process to deal with these uncovered aspect of a legal Fast Roll is not some aspect of impatience. It is finding a way to deal with something the rules failed to adequately address. Grouping them into like AP/Damage just like the Fast Roll rules required from Strength, AP, and Damage is not some 7th Edition wound group concept. It is an extrapolation of the 8th/9th Edition rule.

I can assure you that I am as impatient as the defender or attacker when it comes to Slow Rolling. No one wants to do the Hit, Wound, Save process one attack at a time. We might have all day to play the game, but we don't want to take all day resolving every unit's attacks


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 04:34:17


Post by: p5freak


 alextroy wrote:

I can assure you that I am as impatient as the defender or attacker when it comes to Slow Rolling. No one wants to do the Hit, Wound, Save process one attack at a time. We might have all day to play the game, but we don't want to take all day resolving every unit's attacks


Rolling dice is part of the game. If you are impatient dont play units which have hundreds of attacks. If you feel like fast rolling attacks could break some rules, fast rolling saves also breaks the rules. Are you slow rolling saves ? You dont, no one does that.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 04:42:57


Post by: JakeSiren


 alextroy wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
@Alextroy, wound grouping is a 7th Edition concept. If someone is too impatient to roll properly when it matters, then their opponent should allocate attack order however they see fit. In the case of Bloodletters vs Intercessors, it's entirely reasonable for them to take 1-damage saves first until the first wound, then switch to the 2-damage saves until the Intercessor dies. If the dice were rolled properly, then they would need to resolve the saves in the correct order, but someone fast rolling has thrown out that vital bit of information. Jidmah has a reasonable compromise between the ability to fast roll and the need for resolving attacks in a specific order. Although this only works on the to wound rolls.
Agreeing to a simple process to deal with these uncovered aspect of a legal Fast Roll is not some aspect of impatience. It is finding a way to deal with something the rules failed to adequately address. Grouping them into like AP/Damage just like the Fast Roll rules required from Strength, AP, and Damage is not some 7th Edition wound group concept. It is an extrapolation of the 8th/9th Edition rule.

I can assure you that I am as impatient as the defender or attacker when it comes to Slow Rolling. No one wants to do the Hit, Wound, Save process one attack at a time. We might have all day to play the game, but we don't want to take all day resolving every unit's attacks
It very much is a problem of impatience. You have a way to do it correctly and you chose not to in order to save time. Doing something incorrectly and then making up rules by "extrapolating" is still doing it incorrectly. Wether or not you and your opponent are happy to play incorrectly is between you and your opponent.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 13:20:57


Post by: alextroy


Fast Rolling is correct as it is an explicit option allowed by the rules. That it leads to an issue doesn't make it magically incorrect.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/16 13:50:37


Post by: nosferatu1001


I'd argue that if an aspect of the required-same characteristics can change , then you cannot legally fast roll. An undefined value - a variable - cannot be said to be equal.

So as you NEED to fast roll, to avoid interminable games, then it's on the active player to make sensible concessions as they're the ones choosing to bring the awkward unit.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 03:36:23


Post by: alextroy


And I'd say you are wrong. The rules clearly state you can Fast Roll if the attacks have the same WS/BS, S, AP, Damage, are affected by the same abilities, and aimed a the same target unit.

So Dire Avengers firing their Avenger Shuriken Catapults at the same unit qualify since all the attack are BS 3+, S4, AP -2, D1, Shuriken. It doesn't matter that Shuriken improves the AP by 2 of any attack that has a unmodified Wound Roll of 6. It still meets all the qualifications of the rule.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 08:31:30


Post by: JakeSiren


Let's say you are correct AlexTroy, the end result is that "your opponent can then allocate the attacks one at a time, making the saving throws and suffering damage each time as appropriate"

Which means, your opponent can allocate them in an order that benefits them the most. For example, if you shot your Shurikin in a Drunkhari Archon. Say I'm in cover with the 3+ armour save relic, I could allocate the AP-4 attacks to my Shadowfield until it failed, then allocate the AP-2 attacks to their armour save, and if there are still AP-4 attacks left, resolve them vs my power from pain invuln, allowing for command point rerolls if needed.

The advantage to the defender becomes even clearer when you have a situation of Bloodletters/Plaguebearers vs Intercessors and the mix of 1 or 2 damage attacks.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 09:51:49


Post by: nosferatu1001


The attacks are by definiton a variable between ap-2 and ap-4. You can't ignore rules you find inconvenient.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 10:31:38


Post by: JohnnyHell


JakeSiren wrote:
Let's say you are correct AlexTroy, the end result is that "your opponent can then allocate the attacks one at a time, making the saving throws and suffering damage each time as appropriate"

Which means, your opponent can allocate them in an order that benefits them the most. For example, if you shot your Shurikin in a Drunkhari Archon. Say I'm in cover with the 3+ armour save relic, I could allocate the AP-4 attacks to my Shadowfield until it failed, then allocate the AP-2 attacks to their armour save, and if there are still AP-4 attacks left, resolve them vs my power from pain invuln, allowing for command point rerolls if needed.

The advantage to the defender becomes even clearer when you have a situation of Bloodletters/Plaguebearers vs Intercessors and the mix of 1 or 2 damage attacks.


This tends to be our group’s HIWPI. Allows fast rolling but defender gets an advantage. Any time you house rule there will be unintended consequences, but it’s one we suck up for sake of speed.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 13:30:16


Post by: U02dah4


What your missing is your told to fast role weapons with the same stats together.

Therefore the attacker roles either all the 1 or all the 2 damage weapons. The defender may then alcoate them to a model that model receive all attacks till it dies then you allocate to the next model. Only when they are resolved do you allocate to another model.

in practice this means all 1 damage then all 2 damage or vice versa

MW are always resolved at the end

So the only time you get the defender in a position to allocate would be if you fast-rolled a weapon that did extra damage or Ap on a 6. even then if they wish to fast role their saves they have to pick all of the same characteristic. Remember you can only fast role if they are the same. So at the point of attack they are at the point of save they no longer are so you can fast role in two groups but not one. the alternate is slow rolling the whole fight/shooting



If thats what they want to do I would just play with a tournament clock they can burn their time forcing me to not fast role if they wish to do everything individually. I will be happy to do so ..... slowly. I mean if I'm rolling 40 dice individually and then 40 dice individually again im pretty sure i can burn 10 minutes of their clock time.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 13:32:50


Post by: nosferatu1001


U02 you're not right there. You never have permission to fast roll saves. Any fast rolling is therefore a house rule.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 13:45:51


Post by: U02dah4


Any game I have ever seen played anywhere in 40k involved fast dice rolling of saves

you can call it a house rule

but have you honestly ever witnessed a game where no saves were fast rolled.

If it is a house rule its a house rule in exactly the way you could advance and fire assault weapons in 8th

As in universally played


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 14:22:35


Post by: nosferatu1001


It's literally a house rule. I'm not saying not to do it. However as we've already made up rules (fast rolling saves ) it's not a leap to make up other rules as well.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 15:05:44


Post by: U02dah4


If you just make rules up you have no consistency across forums/games it is therefore not relevant to a rules forum

Fast-rolling saves is a ubiquitous practice

it is not made up


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 16:35:09


Post by: nosferatu1001


Erm, it was literally made up, as it doesn't exist in the written 8th or 9th rules

You have no permission to fast roll saves, but people do it anyway.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/17 23:46:06


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'd argue that if an aspect of the required-same characteristics can change , then you cannot legally fast roll. An undefined value - a variable - cannot be said to be equal.

So as you NEED to fast roll, to avoid interminable games, then it's on the active player to make sensible concessions as they're the ones choosing to bring the awkward unit.


By your reasoning you can't fast roll any weapon grouping that includes variable damage. So no Dam d3 could be rolled together nor d3+3 weapons nor Dam d6 weapons. I have yet to see someone call anyone out of fast rolling for this. Now that doesn't mean that no one has but I'd be surprised if it happened.

It would also mean you couldn't fast roll weapons with a variable number of hits like flamers. By your rational you must roll each flamer individually and complete their attack sequence before moving on to the next flamer. I have never seen that happen either.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 00:32:53


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
If you just make rules up you have no consistency across forums/games it is therefore not relevant to a rules forum

Fast-rolling saves is a ubiquitous practice

it is not made up
Please provide the rules quote that allows fast rolling saves. If you read the "Fast Dice Rolling" tip it explicitly calls out the defender as needing to allocate the fast-rolled attacks one at a time, making saving throws and taking damage as appropriate.

A ubiquitous house rule is still a house rule no matter how convenient. And one that I use when it doesn't change the potential outcome I will add.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Leo_the_Rat wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'd argue that if an aspect of the required-same characteristics can change , then you cannot legally fast roll. An undefined value - a variable - cannot be said to be equal.

So as you NEED to fast roll, to avoid interminable games, then it's on the active player to make sensible concessions as they're the ones choosing to bring the awkward unit.


By your reasoning you can't fast roll any weapon grouping that includes variable damage. So no Dam d3 could be rolled together nor d3+3 weapons nor Dam d6 weapons. I have yet to see someone call anyone out of fast rolling for this. Now that doesn't mean that no one has but I'd be surprised if it happened.

It would also mean you couldn't fast roll weapons with a variable number of hits like flamers. By your rational you must roll each flamer individually and complete their attack sequence before moving on to the next flamer. I have never seen that happen either.

No, that's not the point. After you roll to wound, a weapon with a d3 damage characteristic still has a d3 damage characteristic. Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 10:21:44


Post by: nosferatu1001


As above

If the ap can change from ap2 to ap4, then it doesn't have a fixed AP and so can't be fast rolled. Flamers all having d6 hits all have d6 hits, and so isn't the same


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 10:24:48


Post by: beast_gts


U02dah4 wrote:
but have you honestly ever witnessed a game where no saves were fast rolled.
I have - there're some tournament players who claim knowing how many models are being removed in total affects how you choose which models to remove (but I've never bothered to look into it).


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 10:46:00


Post by: Jidmah


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'd argue that if an aspect of the required-same characteristics can change , then you cannot legally fast roll. An undefined value - a variable - cannot be said to be equal.

So as you NEED to fast roll, to avoid interminable games, then it's on the active player to make sensible concessions as they're the ones choosing to bring the awkward unit.


By your reasoning you can't fast roll any weapon grouping that includes variable damage. So no Dam d3 could be rolled together nor d3+3 weapons nor Dam d6 weapons. I have yet to see someone call anyone out of fast rolling for this. Now that doesn't mean that no one has but I'd be surprised if it happened.

It would also mean you couldn't fast roll weapons with a variable number of hits like flamers. By your rational you must roll each flamer individually and complete their attack sequence before moving on to the next flamer. I have never seen that happen either.


Any time the sequence of attacks matters, you cannot fast-roll. Technically, you can't fast-roll d3 damage weapons against 2 wound models like marines, but you can partially fast-roll them and then roll damage one by one, because it makes a huge difference whether you roll 1, 3, 1 for damage (one dead marine) or 3,1,1 (two dead marines). If someone hasn't called you out on that, the most likely reason is that they are not aware.

The variable hits argument is missing the point that you aren't rolling HITS, but ATTACKS which then auto-hit. No matter how many attacks you roll for a random attack weapon, their profile (BS, S, AP, dmg) will be the same, barring some additional unit interaction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
beast_gts wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
but have you honestly ever witnessed a game where no saves were fast rolled.
I have - there're some tournament players who claim knowing how many models are being removed in total affects how you choose which models to remove (but I've never bothered to look into it).


I do sometimes when it matters - depending on how many models you lose, it might make more sense to keep champion/nob alive or a special weapon guy or a model within range of an objective marker.
It also matters regularly when half a unit in cover and the other half is not.

With "rending" weapons against model with invulnerable saves you can also take all the wounds with higher AP on models not in cover and then have better odds of saving against non-rending one with models in cover.

You need to be aware when there is a benefit for either player and then either slow-roll or at least take make sure no one benefits from speed rolling.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 12:08:41


Post by: nosferatu1001


You can only do the latter if the first models aren't still alive - once you start allocation to a model, that model keeps taking hits until the end of the phase.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 12:43:23


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'd argue that if an aspect of the required-same characteristics can change , then you cannot legally fast roll. An undefined value - a variable - cannot be said to be equal.


I'm just pointing out the fallacy of the first sentence. The #of attacks roll is not the hit roll but it is an aspect of the attack. It is a variable and as such fulfills the definition of nosfeatu's first part of his quote. Therefore the second part must follow. I however play as you have stated regarding variable #number of attacks. If I have a group of weapons whose only variable is the number of attacks then I group them together after determining how many attacks they make in total.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 13:20:51


Post by: Jidmah


nosferatu1001 wrote:
You can only do the latter if the first models aren't still alive - once you start allocation to a model, that model keeps taking hits until the end of the phase.


Of course. I had this come up before AoC with blightlords. I had just one of them in cover and was shot by something that got AP-4 on sixes. He speed-rolled them and informed me of something like four AP-4 hits and ten AP-1 hits. One blightlord without cover took the four AP-4 hits with his 4++ and saved two. He then rolled 3+ saves against the AP-1 hits until he died and then the terminator in cover could use his 2+ for the rest of them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Leo_the_Rat wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'd argue that if an aspect of the required-same characteristics can change , then you cannot legally fast roll. An undefined value - a variable - cannot be said to be equal.


I'm just pointing out the fallacy of the first sentence. The #of attacks roll is not the hit roll but it is an aspect of the attack. It is a variable and as such fulfills the definition of nosfeatu's first part of his quote. Therefore the second part must follow. I however play as you have stated regarding variable #number of attacks. If I have a group of weapons whose only variable is the number of attacks then I group them together after determining how many attacks they make in total.


I'm not sure I can follow. Attacks are resolved separately. Determining the number of attacks comes before resolving them.

Let's pick the eldar nightspinner as an example.

It's doomweaver is Heavy 2D6 S7 AP-2 2dmg
It als has a twin shuriken catapult that is Assault 4 S4 AP-1 1 Shuriken(+2 to ap on sixes)

To resolve the doomweaver, you roll 2d6 to see the number of attacks. You roll a 7. You then have 7 attacks which all share the same BS, strength, AP, damage. Therefore you can fast roll 7 dice at once or roll all 7 one after the other.
For your unsaved wounds, your opponent is allowed to roll them all at once and remove casualties.
If there is FNP on the target units and the units, he is not allowed to speed roll that but has to roll them two at a time - the sequence can change how many models die.
Technically, your opponent has less information to decide which units to allocate the wounds to if you don't speed roll, but I feel like that rarely matters in reality.

To resolve the shuriken catapult you have a fixed 4 attacks which might or might not have the same BS, strength, AP and damage. As this depends on the wound roll, you cannot speed roll them as the sequence of the AP-1 and AP-3 hits might change the outcome (as seen in my example above). Your opponent then has to save against each attack you before you roll for the next one.

Of course, you can just speed roll them anyways and allow your opponent to pick the order most beneficial to them.
Same applies if both AP-1 and AP-3 completely ignore the enemy armor or reduce it to their invul save - you can just speed-roll here as well.
If you do, your opponent also can speed-roll their FNP, because for 1 wound models being shot by 1 damage weapons always results in the same amount of casualties (= number of failed FNP rolls), no matter the sequence.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 14:23:58


Post by: nosferatu1001


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'd argue that if an aspect of the required-same characteristics can change , then you cannot legally fast roll. An undefined value - a variable - cannot be said to be equal.


I'm just pointing out the fallacy of the first sentence. The #of attacks roll is not the hit roll but it is an aspect of the attack. It is a variable and as such fulfills the definition of nosfeatu's first part of his quote. Therefore the second part must follow. I however play as you have stated regarding variable #number of attacks. If I have a group of weapons whose only variable is the number of attacks then I group them together after determining how many attacks they make in total.

I think you've misread.

Number of attacks is not required to be the same. It is not one of the required-same char, namely strength, ap and damage.

If an attack can be ap-2 OR ap-4 it does not qualify for fast rolling


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 14:35:35


Post by: U02dah4


beast_gts wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
but have you honestly ever witnessed a game where no saves were fast rolled.
I have - there're some tournament players who claim knowing how many models are being removed in total affects how you choose which models to remove (but I've never bothered to look into it).


It could in a hypothetical way but in reality it only matters when the actual differs massively from the probable. And only in one direction. (as in if you save massively better than you should). If the unit dies it doesn't matter and if its the expected result it probably doesn't change anything.

I go to lots of tourneys and you don't normally encounter this if you do I'm doing it on a clock on their time

It's probably more the persons perception it makes a difference than the actuality.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 15:13:51


Post by: nosferatu1001


There's multiple scenario where fast rolling gives you far too much info - contesting objectives being the obvious one.

It's far more abusive to fast roll where you have Harlie rerolls tho


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 15:48:58


Post by: DeathReaper


JakeSiren wrote:
.... Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.
Citation needed.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 18:37:31


Post by: U02dah4


nosferatu1001 wrote:
There's multiple scenario where fast rolling gives you far too much info - contesting objectives being the obvious one.

It's far more abusive to fast roll where you have Harlie rerolls tho


Not really I have 5 battle sisters on an objective they have 3 models

3 Sisters die it doesn't matter which in anyway.

You would have to have some on the objective and some not for it to even matter and even then your almost always removing the non objective models either way

Sure whether or not you use a CP reroll might vary but only if you were very close to a unit being wiped


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 21:30:45


Post by: JakeSiren


 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
.... Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.
Citation needed.
Codex: Chaos Daemons, pg 103, Datasheet Bloodletters, Hellblade Weapon Ability: "Attacks with a wound roll of 6+ for this weapon have a Damage characteristic of 2 instead of 1"
There are plenty of other examples I could find you, and others have already mentioned some of them.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/18 22:12:40


Post by: nosferatu1001


U02 you've missed the obvious as to whether the slow roll vs fast tells you to waste a cp reroll or not. Similar for harlie rerolls.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 01:04:43


Post by: DeathReaper


JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
.... Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.
Citation needed.
Codex: Chaos Daemons, pg 103, Datasheet Bloodletters, Hellblade Weapon Ability: "Attacks with a wound roll of 6+ for this weapon have a Damage characteristic of 2 instead of 1"
There are plenty of other examples I could find you, and others have already mentioned some of them.
What you quoted has nothing to do with the fast rolling rules.

I need a citation that proves what you (JakeSiren) said, specifically:
JakeSiren wrote:
.... Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.

Basically the citation provided needs to prove that "attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling."

There is not any rules that make attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution ineligible for fast rolling. Unless you have a citation to the contrary.

The fast rolling rules care about the listed items before you roll to hit.

The fast rolling rules state:

"In order to make several attacks at once, all of the attacks must have the same Ballistic Skill (if it's a shooting attack) or the same Weapon Skill (if it's a close combat attack). They must also have the same Strength and Armour Penetration characteristics, they must inflict the same Damage, they must be affected by the same abilities, and they must be directed at the same unit."

A to hit or would roll changing the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the roll is not taken into consideration in the fast roll rules, as the damage of the weapon used is the same at the point you are going to make attacks.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 02:23:25


Post by: JakeSiren


 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
.... Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.
Citation needed.
Codex: Chaos Daemons, pg 103, Datasheet Bloodletters, Hellblade Weapon Ability: "Attacks with a wound roll of 6+ for this weapon have a Damage characteristic of 2 instead of 1"
There are plenty of other examples I could find you, and others have already mentioned some of them.
What you quoted has nothing to do with the fast rolling rules.

I need a citation that proves what you (JakeSiren) said, specifically:
JakeSiren wrote:
.... Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.

Basically the citation provided needs to prove that "attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling."

There is not any rules that make attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution ineligible for fast rolling. Unless you have a citation to the contrary.

The fast rolling rules care about the listed items before you roll to hit.

The fast rolling rules state:

"In order to make several attacks at once, all of the attacks must have the same Ballistic Skill (if it's a shooting attack) or the same Weapon Skill (if it's a close combat attack). They must also have the same Strength and Armour Penetration characteristics, they must inflict the same Damage, they must be affected by the same abilities, and they must be directed at the same unit."

A to hit or would roll changing the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the roll is not taken into consideration in the fast roll rules, as the damage of the weapon used is the same at the point you are going to make attacks.
Oh, you were unclear on what you wanted cited, I can see now how you might have been asking for proof on the fast roll.

The proof is simple, before rolling the dice you don't know if the attacks will have the same strength, armour penetration, or damage characteristic. The best you can say is that they might have the same characteristics. Therefore you cannot fulfil the condition that all fast-rolled attacks must have the same characteristics.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 03:56:42


Post by: alextroy


JakeSiren wrote:
Spoiler:
 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
.... Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.
Citation needed.
Codex: Chaos Daemons, pg 103, Datasheet Bloodletters, Hellblade Weapon Ability: "Attacks with a wound roll of 6+ for this weapon have a Damage characteristic of 2 instead of 1"
There are plenty of other examples I could find you, and others have already mentioned some of them.
What you quoted has nothing to do with the fast rolling rules.

I need a citation that proves what you (JakeSiren) said, specifically:
JakeSiren wrote:
.... Some units have rules that change the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the to wound. It's these attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling.

Basically the citation provided needs to prove that "attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution that makes them ineligible for fast rolling."

There is not any rules that make attacks where the weapons characteristic can change mid-resolution ineligible for fast rolling. Unless you have a citation to the contrary.

The fast rolling rules care about the listed items before you roll to hit.

The fast rolling rules state:

"In order to make several attacks at once, all of the attacks must have the same Ballistic Skill (if it's a shooting attack) or the same Weapon Skill (if it's a close combat attack). They must also have the same Strength and Armour Penetration characteristics, they must inflict the same Damage, they must be affected by the same abilities, and they must be directed at the same unit."

A to hit or would roll changing the weapons damage characteristic after rolling the roll is not taken into consideration in the fast roll rules, as the damage of the weapon used is the same at the point you are going to make attacks.
Oh, you were unclear on what you wanted cited, I can see now how you might have been asking for proof on the fast roll.

The proof is simple, before rolling the dice you don't know if the attacks will have the same strength, armour penetration, or damage characteristic. The best you can say is that they might have the same characteristics. Therefore you cannot fulfil the condition that all fast-rolled attacks must have the same characteristics.
That's not proof. That is an assertion that lacks any proof. You need to use actual rules statements to make a proof.

The fact is all attacks of a Shuriken Cannon made by a model have the same Ballistic Skill (the model's), are Strength 6, AP -1, Damage 2, and have the Shuriken ability. The rules for Fast Rolling in no way stipulate that you cannot fast roll if one of the Abilities that the attacks share might change the Strength, AP, or Damage of the attack. They therefore are eligible to be Fast Rolled.

If you feel my proof is incorrect, please show us a rule or an actual flaw in logic that says I am wrong.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 04:08:14


Post by: DeathReaper


JakeSiren wrote:
Oh, you were unclear on what you wanted cited, I can see now how you might have been asking for proof on the fast roll.

The proof is simple, before rolling the dice you don't know if the attacks will have the same strength, armour penetration, or damage characteristic. The best you can say is that they might have the same characteristics. Therefore you cannot fulfil the condition that all fast-rolled attacks must have the same characteristics.
Actually, at the time you go to fast roll, the Bloodletters do have the same characteristics, So you can fast roll.

I do not understand why you say "that they might have the same characteristics" when I looked at the Dataslate and all Codex: Chaos Daemons, pg 103, Datasheet Bloodletters have the same Strength characteristic (User), Armour penetration characteristic (-3), and they inflict the same Damage (1)

They do not do 2 damage unless you meet a certain condition, which is not met when determining if fast rolling is allowed. Ergo, fast rolling is allowed since the Bloodletters have the same Strength characteristic (User), Armour penetration characteristic (-3), and they inflict the same Damage (1)



Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 04:58:29


Post by: JakeSiren


It appears that my argument is not convincing for you. At least inappropriately fast rolling in this situation potentially allows the defender to gain a considerable advantage over the attacker.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 08:10:47


Post by: nosferatu1001


"They MUST inflict the same damage" is t fulfilled if the damage is either damage 1 or damage 2, because it does not state "before you roll9. Inflict requires that the damage inflicted must be the same.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 08:23:01


Post by: DeathReaper


JakeSiren wrote:
It appears that my argument is not convincing for you. At least inappropriately fast rolling in this situation potentially allows the defender to gain a considerable advantage over the attacker.
Well, your argument does not follow the rules, so of course it is not convincing.

As an attacker, you have the choice to fast roll or not...

If the defender gains a considerable advantage over the attacker with fast rolling, then just do not opt to fast roll. Simple. You do not ever have to fast roll, it is optional.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
"They MUST inflict the same damage" is t fulfilled if the damage is either damage 1 or damage 2, because it does not state "before you roll9. Inflict requires that the damage inflicted must be the same.
They DO inflict the same damage. The damage they inflict is 1, it says so on the Dataslate.

The damage is not "1 or damage 2". The Dataslate says the Damage is 1, therefore the damage is 1.

When you determine if fast rolling is allowed, they do 1 damage. That is what is listed.

The fact that they might be able to do more than one is not taken into consideration when you determine if they get to fast roll, because when you determine if you can fast roll, they do 1 damage, and not 2.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 10:09:02


Post by: Jidmah


DeathReaper, "Inflict damage" is a defined term and that definition does not agree with yours.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 10:38:19


Post by: nosferatu1001


As above. Even if it wasn't a defined term, I can prove they DONT inflict the same damage. That the rule isn't on the dataslate is completely irrelevant to the requirement that they MUST inflict the same damage.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 10:45:11


Post by: p5freak


How much damage they inflict is unknown, because thats determined when rolling dice. Because of that you cannot fast roll bloodletter attacks. The damage characteristic is not the same as inflict damage, in this case.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 10:56:49


Post by: JohnnyHell


Honestly, the less you fast roll the fewer edge case problems that shouldn’t exist you create.

If you fast roll you accept certain concessions.

If you fast roll things the rules don’t permit, like damage or AP that might change, or like saves, you’re into the weeds and need to find a way through with your opponent because you left the rules behind!

It takes less time to slow roll things that matter than fast roll when you shouldn’t, argue, figure out how to resolve this broken area you shouldn’t be in, move on with bad feelings because someone had unintended benefit etc etc.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 11:02:16


Post by: Tyel


I don't think there's any basis for it - but we always just fast rolled, and then the defender can choose to fast roll all modified saves or unmodified saves - then the other. D3 damage into say 2 wound models has to be rolled separately. This does I guess give the defender certain advantages - but it seems likely to be modest outside of the most skewed scenarios.

This is admittedly clearly wrong when looking at something like Incubi - where you both modify the AP and the damage. But I've never rolled or been asked to roll the 16~ dice individually, just because the order that AP-4 3 damage hit arguably matters. Which I guess is just bad rules all round, but it keeps things simple.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 11:50:57


Post by: nosferatu1001


If you bring a unit you can't legit fast roll, that's on you. If you need to fast roll to not time out, then you're going to have to give concession to the defender. You don't get the best of both worlds.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 13:07:11


Post by: Jidmah


nosferatu1001 wrote:
If you bring a unit you can't legit fast roll, that's on you. If you need to fast roll to not time out, then you're going to have to give concession to the defender. You don't get the best of both worlds.


There are plenty of ways to roll multiple dice quickly while maintaining the sequence of rolls. Colored dice, left-to-right and dice apps for example.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 13:20:37


Post by: nosferatu1001


Oh absolutely, I'm not saying there isn't. But my point stands that if you can't legit fast roll, you either slow roll or you give concessions to the defender.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 13:51:58


Post by: Jidmah


nosferatu1001 wrote:
Oh absolutely, I'm not saying there isn't. But my point stands that if you can't legit fast roll, you either slow roll or you give concessions to the defender.


Agree.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 16:17:31


Post by: alextroy


Jidmah wrote:DeathReaper, "Inflict damage" is a defined term and that definition does not agree with yours.

p5freak wrote:How much damage they inflict is unknown, because thats determined when rolling dice. Because of that you cannot fast roll bloodletter attacks. The damage characteristic is not the same as inflict damage, in this case.

I'm curious as to what you two think that definition is? The only one I can find is inferred from the Inflict Damage stage of an attack where it states "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack". This means an attack inflicts damage equal to its Damage characteristic.

For a Bloodletter that value is 1. An ability might change that, but that is find for Fast Rolling since the presence of an Ability is accounted for by that rule.

nosferatu1001 wrote:If you bring a unit you can't legit fast roll, that's on you. If you need to fast roll to not time out, then you're going to have to give concession to the defender. You don't get the best of both worlds.
You are arguing that you can't legit fast roll an attack that follows all the rules for Fast Rolling? That's an interesting argument. So I take it you believe that no attack with variable damage can be fast rolled? That seems to be the implication of your arguments about not knowing the final Damage characteristic when making an attack.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 16:21:34


Post by: DeathReaper


 Jidmah wrote:
DeathReaper, "Inflict damage" is a defined term and that definition does not agree with yours.
"Inflict damage" is a defined term, it has its own section in the book (Though it is not in the rules terms glossary).

The fast rolling rules do not say "Inflict damage" it says the attacks "must inflict the same Damage" (I am not sure that changes anything, but accuracy matters).

However P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE" it says "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack."

The Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon in question is 1. This is proven on the Bloodletter Dataslate.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
As above. Even if it wasn't a defined term, I can prove they DONT inflict the same damage. That the rule isn't on the dataslate is completely irrelevant to the requirement that they MUST inflict the same damage.
Except they do. The Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon in question is 1.

 p5freak wrote:
How much damage they inflict is unknown, because thats determined when rolling dice. Because of that you cannot fast roll bloodletter attacks. The damage characteristic is not the same as inflict damage, in this case.
False.

How much damage they inflict is known, it is literally printed on the Dataslate...

The Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon in question is 1.

P.S. Page 7 in the PDF, or Page 202 in the BRB rules proves that the damage characteristic is printed in a certain place on the Dataslate.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 16:25:49


Post by: JohnnyHell


And what happens to those Bloodletters’ attacks on a 6+ To Wound? You missed that bit.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 16:44:14


Post by: DeathReaper


 JohnnyHell wrote:
And what happens to those Bloodletters’ attacks on a 6+ To Wound? You missed that bit.
Whatever happens to them normally. The fast rolling rule does not care about what happens when you roll to wound.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 20:04:51


Post by: p5freak


 DeathReaper wrote:
The fast rolling rule does not care about what happens when you roll to wound.


False. The fast rolling rule cares about inflicting damage. It is impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, because that is determined with wound rolls. The damage characteristic is irrelevant.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 20:47:14


Post by: alextroy


 JohnnyHell wrote:
And what happens to those Bloodletters’ attacks on a 6+ To Wound? You missed that bit.
It is irrelevant. If all the attacks to be Fast Rolled have the same Ability then they can be Fast Rolled.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/19 22:59:00


Post by: JohnnyHell


Good grief people make a mountain out of the Fast Rolling molehill, don’t they?

How is “this stat may end up different” irrelevant? It really isn’t. Come on peeps. Fast roll variable things and weird stuff happens, so enjoy spending your time in the weeds, arguing!


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 00:01:11


Post by: DeathReaper


 p5freak wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
The fast rolling rule does not care about what happens when you roll to wound.
False. The fast rolling rule cares about inflicting damage.
It cares that the attacks "must inflict the same Damage".

The fast rolling rules do not say "Inflict damage" it says the attacks "must inflict the same Damage"

This is determined before you roll to hit, so what I said is true.
 p5freak wrote:
It is impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, because that is determined with wound rolls.

It is not impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, they inflict 1 damage. This is proven by looking at the Bloodletter Dataslate.

The rule for fast rolling states the attacks "must inflict the same Damage".

P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE" says "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack."

What is the "Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack." when we are talking about the Bloodletter Dataslate?

 p5freak wrote:
The damage characteristic is irrelevant.
That is 100% not what P221, or 18 in the PDF rules says. (And I have shown quotes that makes your statement false).


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 00:25:42


Post by: Cheex


Me reading this thread: yeah, I'm just gonna keep fast rolling my Bloodletters and letting my opponent allocate them as they wish.

Keep it stupid, simple.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 00:26:13


Post by: JakeSiren


 DeathReaper wrote:

It is not impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, they inflict 1 damage. This is proven by looking at the Bloodletter Dataslate.
So even if you roll a 6 to wound, they only inflict one damage because you know that’s how much damage they will inflict.

A bold take.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Cheex wrote:
Me reading this thread: yeah, I'm just gonna keep fast rolling my Bloodletters and letting my opponent allocate them as they wish.

Keep it stupid, simple.
It's a fair concession. I think the key point is that people fast rolling need to be aware that the defender can dramatically reduce the incoming damage by allocating wounds in a way that negates the bonus damage. Ie, Intercessors taking 1-damage saves then switching to 2-damage saves once they failed one, and reverting back to the 1-damage after the model is slain.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 02:00:42


Post by: DeathReaper


JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

It is not impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, they inflict 1 damage. This is proven by looking at the Bloodletter Dataslate.
So even if you roll a 6 to wound, they only inflict one damage because you know that’s how much damage they will inflict.

A bold take.
You seemed to miss the point of my post. I never said anything about rolling to wound. I was talking about a point in time.

We know how much damage they will inflict, at the time we determine if they are allowed to fast roll or not...

Therefore you can fast roll, because at that point they all "inflict the same Damage", which is what the fast rolling rule looks for.

The fast rolling rule is concerned with the status of the listed items at the point in time where you are going to make your attacks. And at that time, the bloodletters do 1 damage.

The damage may change in the future, but they does not matter to the fast rolling rules.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 02:04:35


Post by: alextroy


I think we can now conclusively state that 10 Edition 40K need to be written with batch rolling as part of the Core Rules rather than as a hastily and badly thought out add-on.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 02:33:58


Post by: JakeSiren


 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

It is not impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, they inflict 1 damage. This is proven by looking at the Bloodletter Dataslate.
So even if you roll a 6 to wound, they only inflict one damage because you know that’s how much damage they will inflict.

A bold take.
You seemed to miss the point of my post. I never said anything about rolling to wound. I was talking about a point in time.

We know how much damage they will inflict, at the time we determine if they are allowed to fast roll or not...

Therefore you can fast roll, because at that point they all "inflict the same Damage", which is what the fast rolling rule looks for.

The fast rolling rule is concerned with the status of the listed items at the point in time where you are going to make your attacks. And at that time, the bloodletters do 1 damage.

The damage may change in the future, but they does not matter to the fast rolling rules.
No, you missed the point.

Before rolling we don't know that they will inflict the same damage.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 03:55:05


Post by: p5freak


 DeathReaper wrote:

P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE" says "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack."


Their datasheet overrules this, because their damage characteristic becomes 2, when you roll a 6 to wound.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 05:12:10


Post by: alextroy


JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

It is not impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, they inflict 1 damage. This is proven by looking at the Bloodletter Dataslate.
So even if you roll a 6 to wound, they only inflict one damage because you know that’s how much damage they will inflict.

A bold take.
You seemed to miss the point of my post. I never said anything about rolling to wound. I was talking about a point in time.

We know how much damage they will inflict, at the time we determine if they are allowed to fast roll or not...

Therefore you can fast roll, because at that point they all "inflict the same Damage", which is what the fast rolling rule looks for.

The fast rolling rule is concerned with the status of the listed items at the point in time where you are going to make your attacks. And at that time, the bloodletters do 1 damage.

The damage may change in the future, but they does not matter to the fast rolling rules.
No, you missed the point.

Before rolling we don't know that they will inflict the same damage.
Before rolling we don’t know if they will inflict any damage at all. So I don’t really see the relevance of your point.

And what about those weapons with a variable D stat, like D6. We don’t know they will inflict the same damage. Are they also ineligible for Fast Rolling?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 05:40:12


Post by: p5freak


 alextroy wrote:
Before rolling we don’t know if they will inflict any damage at all. So I don’t really see the relevance of your point.

And what about those weapons with a variable D stat, like D6. We don’t know they will inflict the same damage. Are they also ineligible for Fast Rolling?


Thats a good point. Its possible that any weapon will not inflict any damage, therefore no weapon is eligible for fast rolling


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 07:06:16


Post by: DeathReaper


Spoiler:
JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

It is not impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, they inflict 1 damage. This is proven by looking at the Bloodletter Dataslate.
So even if you roll a 6 to wound, they only inflict one damage because you know that’s how much damage they will inflict.

A bold take.
You seemed to miss the point of my post. I never said anything about rolling to wound. I was talking about a point in time.

We know how much damage they will inflict, at the time we determine if they are allowed to fast roll or not...

Therefore you can fast roll, because at that point they all "inflict the same Damage", which is what the fast rolling rule looks for.

The fast rolling rule is concerned with the status of the listed items at the point in time where you are going to make your attacks. And at that time, the bloodletters do 1 damage.

The damage may change in the future, but they does not matter to the fast rolling rules.
No, you missed the point.

Before rolling we don't know that they will inflict the same damage.
What you said does not matter, because the rules clearly do not care about the wound rolls...

The fast rolling rules care only about certain things before you roll to hit... So, what the damage may possibly end up being, has literally no bearing on the fast rolling rules.

 p5freak wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE" says "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack."
Their datasheet overrules this, because their damage characteristic becomes 2, when you roll a 6 to wound.
Which is of course irrelevant to the Fast rolling rules.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 07:09:19


Post by: Jidmah


 alextroy wrote:
And what about those weapons with a variable D stat, like D6. We don’t know they will inflict the same damage. Are they also ineligible for Fast Rolling?


Correct, you cannot fast-roll them, as described in the book.

Most people get around the sequencing issue by fast-rolling up to the step when the stats are variable and fast roll from there - in this case, you roll damage one by one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DeathReaper wrote:
The fast rolling rules care only about certain things before you roll to hit... So, what the damage may possibly end up being, has literally no bearing on the fast rolling rules.

 p5freak wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE" says "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack."
Their datasheet overrules this, because their damage characteristic becomes 2, when you roll a 6 to wound.
Which is of course irrelevant to the Fast rolling rules.


DeathReaper, does the model targeted by the attack lose one or two wounds?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 07:54:05


Post by: DeathReaper


Spoiler:
 Jidmah wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
And what about those weapons with a variable D stat, like D6. We don’t know they will inflict the same damage. Are they also ineligible for Fast Rolling?


Correct, you cannot fast-roll them, as described in the book.

Most people get around the sequencing issue by fast-rolling up to the step when the stats are variable and fast roll from there - in this case, you roll damage one by one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DeathReaper wrote:
The fast rolling rules care only about certain things before you roll to hit... So, what the damage may possibly end up being, has literally no bearing on the fast rolling rules.

 p5freak wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE" says "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack."
Their datasheet overrules this, because their damage characteristic becomes 2, when you roll a 6 to wound.
Which is of course irrelevant to the Fast rolling rules.


DeathReaper, does the model targeted by the attack lose one or two wounds?
What is on the dataslate at the time you determine if you fast roll? 1 or 2?

It may take 2 if certain conditions are met, but those do not matter to the Fast rolling rules.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 08:41:47


Post by: JohnnyHell


This has become one of the most ridiculous threads in ages. We’re now at the “guy saying a weapon that could do D2 is a D1 weapon”. Schroedinger’s Bloodletter screams. Everyone else groans.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 08:59:50


Post by: DeathReaper


 JohnnyHell wrote:
This has become one of the most ridiculous threads in ages. We’re now at the “guy saying a weapon that could do D2 is a D1 weapon”. Schroedinger’s Bloodletter screams. Everyone else groans.
Thats not what I am saying at all, did you even read the thread?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 09:03:43


Post by: p5freak


 DeathReaper wrote:
What is on the dataslate at the time you determine if you fast roll? 1 or 2?


Which is completely irrelevant, because the fast roll rules only care about inflict damage. All attacks must inflict the same damage, if not, you cannot fast roll. And because you cannot know what the wound rolls will be, if they will inflict 1 or 2 damage, no fast rolls allowed.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 09:15:52


Post by: JohnnyHell


 DeathReaper wrote:
 JohnnyHell wrote:
This has become one of the most ridiculous threads in ages. We’re now at the “guy saying a weapon that could do D2 is a D1 weapon”. Schroedinger’s Bloodletter screams. Everyone else groans.
Thats not what I am saying at all, did you even read the thread?


Did you? Come on man! You’re the one tilting at a windmill here. If the damage stat could vary for each attack, does each attack have the same damage? You keep dodging this.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 09:18:28


Post by: JakeSiren


 DeathReaper wrote:
Spoiler:
JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

It is not impossible to know how much damage they will inflict, they inflict 1 damage. This is proven by looking at the Bloodletter Dataslate.
So even if you roll a 6 to wound, they only inflict one damage because you know that’s how much damage they will inflict.

A bold take.
You seemed to miss the point of my post. I never said anything about rolling to wound. I was talking about a point in time.

We know how much damage they will inflict, at the time we determine if they are allowed to fast roll or not...

Therefore you can fast roll, because at that point they all "inflict the same Damage", which is what the fast rolling rule looks for.

The fast rolling rule is concerned with the status of the listed items at the point in time where you are going to make your attacks. And at that time, the bloodletters do 1 damage.

The damage may change in the future, but they does not matter to the fast rolling rules.
No, you missed the point.

Before rolling we don't know that they will inflict the same damage.
What you said does not matter, because the rules clearly do not care about the wound rolls...

The fast rolling rules care only about certain things before you roll to hit... So, what the damage may possibly end up being, has literally no bearing on the fast rolling rules.

It 100% matters. You said you "know how much damage they will inflict", but admitting that the damage may possibly change is an admission that you don't!

If you don't know how much damage an attack will inflict, then you can't fulfill the fast roll requirement that all of the attacks must inflict the same damage.

The short is, if you fast rolling gives an advantage or disadvantage to one player over the other, where slow rolling doesn't, then you shouldn't fast roll.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 09:56:37


Post by: DeathReaper


 p5freak wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
What is on the dataslate at the time you determine if you fast roll? 1 or 2?

Which is completely irrelevant
Well that is false.

How is the characteristic irrelevant, when the rule explicitly calls out the characteristic?

 JohnnyHell wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
 JohnnyHell wrote:
This has become one of the most ridiculous threads in ages. We’re now at the “guy saying a weapon that could do D2 is a D1 weapon”. Schroedinger’s Bloodletter screams. Everyone else groans.
Thats not what I am saying at all, did you even read the thread?


Did you? Come on man! You’re the one tilting at a windmill here. If the damage stat could vary for each attack, does each attack have the same damage? You keep dodging this.
Of course I read it, clearly you did not...

It DOES NOT MATTER If the damage stat could vary for each attack. That is not at all what the fast rolling rules care about. you do realize this right?
JakeSiren wrote:
It 100% matters. You said you "know how much damage they will inflict", but admitting that the damage may possibly change is an admission that you don't!
We know how much damage they will inflict, when the rules for fast rolling comes into play. And that is what matters...
If you don't know how much damage an attack will inflict, then you can't fulfill the fast roll requirement that all of the attacks must inflict the same damage.

The short is, if you fast rolling gives an advantage or disadvantage to one player over the other, where slow rolling doesn't, then you shouldn't fast roll.
Except, at the point we go to fast roll we 100% know what damage they will inflict, as they have a D characteristic that tells us that.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 10:16:13


Post by: JohnnyHell


You simply don’t understand the core of the fast rolling rule, or the text of it. No point debating as you aren’t following the letter or spirit of the rule, seem to just being dogmatically contrarian at this point.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 10:21:35


Post by: JakeSiren


I had written up something in response to DeathReaper, but I agree with Johnny about DeathReaper being contrarian.

The adherence to "We know how much damage they will inflict" when it's blatantly false is just embarrassing.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 10:49:39


Post by: p5freak


 DeathReaper wrote:
 p5freak wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
What is on the dataslate at the time you determine if you fast roll? 1 or 2?

Which is completely irrelevant
Well that is false.

How is the characteristic irrelevant, when the rule explicitly calls out the characteristic?


Your fast roll rule must be different from mine. I dont see anything about the damage characteristic there.

FAST DICE ROLLING

In order to make several attacks at once, all of the attacks must have the same ballistic skill (if its a shooting attack), or the same weapon skill (if its a close combat attack). They must also have the same strength and armour penetration, they must inflict the same damage, they must be affected by the same abilities, and they must be directed at the same unit.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 11:25:03


Post by: Jidmah


 DeathReaper wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
DeathReaper, does the model targeted by the attack lose one or two wounds?
What is on the dataslate at the time you determine if you fast roll? 1 or 2?

It may take 2 if certain conditions are met, but those do not matter to the Fast rolling rules.


Answer the question. Avoiding it proves that you are arguing in bad faith.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 12:16:44


Post by: nosferatu1001


DR - : "Attacks with a wound roll of 6+ for this weapon have a Damage characteristic of 2 instead of 1"

So we know the characteristic is either d1 OR d2, and as such you CANNOT fulfil the requirement that they MUST inflict the SAME damage

You are wrong on this.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 13:11:02


Post by: DeathReaper


 JohnnyHell wrote:
You simply don’t understand the core of the fast rolling rule, or the text of it. No point debating as you aren’t following the letter or spirit of the rule, seem to just being dogmatically contrarian at this point.
I am following the rule to the letter.

What part do you think I am not understanding?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
DR - : "Attacks with a wound roll of 6+ for this weapon have a Damage characteristic of 2 instead of 1"

So we know the characteristic is either d1 OR d2, and as such you CANNOT fulfil the requirement that they MUST inflict the SAME damage

You are wrong on this.
No, I am not wrong, because you literally can not take that into consideration, as the Fast rolling rule has a timing issue that you are overlooking.

At the point when you determine if you can or can not fast roll, all of the attacks have the same damage characteristic. I have proven this is my previous posts.
 Jidmah wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
DeathReaper, does the model targeted by the attack lose one or two wounds?
What is on the dataslate at the time you determine if you fast roll? 1 or 2?

It may take 2 if certain conditions are met, but those do not matter to the Fast rolling rules.


Answer the question. Avoiding it proves that you are arguing in bad faith.
You are also missing the timing issue. Your question is simply not relevant to the Fast rolling rule.

 p5freak wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
 p5freak wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
What is on the dataslate at the time you determine if you fast roll? 1 or 2?

Which is completely irrelevant
Well that is false.

How is the characteristic irrelevant, when the rule explicitly calls out the characteristic?


Your fast roll rule must be different from mine. I dont see anything about the damage characteristic there.

FAST DICE ROLLING

In order to make several attacks at once, all of the attacks must have the same ballistic skill (if its a shooting attack), or the same weapon skill (if its a close combat attack). They must also have the same strength and armour penetration, they must inflict the same damage, they must be affected by the same abilities, and they must be directed at the same unit.


I quoted it before, but ill do so again.

The part that says "they must inflict the same damage" Here is what that means:

P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE" says "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack."

So we know the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack is = to The damage inflicted. and in the case of bloodletters, the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack is 1.

So when the fast roll rule says "they must inflict the same damage" that means nothing if you do not look at all the rules involved. Do not ignore the rules about inflicting damage

P.S. My fast roll rule is not different from yours, why would it be?



Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 13:17:04


Post by: nosferatu1001


"Must inflict the same damage"
Yet they don't. We know for a fact that they MAY NOT inflict the same damage.this breaks the requirement.

I'm not ignoring a timing issue. You are creating a timing restriction out of whole cloth, as well as a desire to only look at the dataslate and not the rule which says the characteristic can change.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
And, again, you ignored the rule I quoted showing that the D char of the attack is one OR two. It isn't alwsys one

You're wrong.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 13:20:48


Post by: DeathReaper


nosferatu1001 wrote:
"Must inflict the same damage"
Yet they don't.
Except they do at the time you determine if you can fast roll.

How are you of all people getting this one wrong?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 13:22:45


Post by: Jidmah


 DeathReaper wrote:
You are also missing the timing issue.

There is no timing issue, as the rule has no timing.

If you have fast-rolled the attack and the conditions are no longer true, you have broken the rules.

 DeathReaper wrote:
P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE" says "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack."


Actual rule:
"The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack. A model loses one wound for each point of damage it suffers."

 Jidmah wrote:
DeathReaper, does the model targeted by the attack lose one or two wounds?


Now, do you answer the question or do you admit arguing in bad faith? After having being caught falsifying the rules for the sake of your argument?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 14:15:35


Post by: deviantduck


It's so simple Deathreaper. You just have to roll out every dice one at a time, to hit and to wound, then we know enough data to have permission to go back and fast roll them all. /s

Isn't the standard way most people would roll in this situation to:

Roll X number of to hits.
Remove misses.
Separate 6s and non 6s.
Roll 6s to wounds.
Opponent takes saves.
Roll non 6 to wounds.
Opponent takes saves.

Move on with life.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 14:26:52


Post by: nosferatu1001


 DeathReaper wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
"Must inflict the same damage"
Yet they don't.
Except they do at the time you determine if you can fast roll.

How are you of all people getting this one wrong?

Except they don't. They will inflict either one damage or two damage.
At the time you determine if you can fast roll you do not know if they will inflict (future, not inflicting,present) the same damage, and as that is a condition of the fast roll, you cannot fast roll

You are changing the language to suit.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 14:32:31


Post by: alextroy


I think most people in this Bloodletter situation:

Rolls all the unit’s attacks to hits.
Remove misses.
Roll to Wound.
Remove fails.
Separate 6s.
Tell the opponent there are A D1 wounds and B D2 wounds.
Opponent takes saves.

The last step is where we have a minor rules breakdown as there is no guidance on how to order the D1 and D2 attacks.

Some think the sequence above is legal with a missing rule for final resolution.

Some think if there is any possibility of the attack damage being different, even wirh a variable D characteristic like D6, that you aren’t allowed to Fast Roll.

I find it comical that people actually believe that GW intended for large portions of entire armies be unable to Fast Roll.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 15:45:28


Post by: Jidmah


The fast roll part isn't an actual rule, but labled "hints&tips". Absolutely nothing prevents you from speeding up the game by rolling multiple dice at once unless it changes the outcome of the roll.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 16:07:54


Post by: JohnnyHell


So wrong. Can a mod lock this to save this going round in an embarrassing circle of wrong?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/20 23:22:33


Post by: DeathReaper


 Jidmah wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
You are also missing the timing issue.

There is no timing issue, as the rule has no timing.
You know that is not true.

When to you determine if you can fast roll?

P.S. It tells you this on P221 (or 18 in the PDF rules) under "5. INFLICT DAMAGE"

"In order to make several attacks at once..."

There is your timing. you determine the conditions at that point, not after.
nosferatu1001 wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
"Must inflict the same damage"
Yet they don't.
Except they do at the time you determine if you can fast roll.

How are you of all people getting this one wrong?

Except they don't. They will inflict either one damage or two damage.
Due to the timing of the fast rolling rules, this does not matter for fast rolling determination.

At the time you determine if you can fast roll you do not know if they will inflict (future, not inflicting,present) the same damage, and as that is a condition of the fast roll, you cannot fast roll

You are changing the language to suit.
What you are saying here just does not matter to the fast rolling rules.

There is a timing issue, and at the time you determine if you can fast roll or not, they 100% do "inflict the same Damage" because "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the weapon making the attack." Nowhere in there does it say the damage is anything else except for the D characteristic of the weapon.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 01:59:28


Post by: JakeSiren


 alextroy wrote:
The last step is where we have a minor rules breakdown as there is no guidance on how to order the D1 and D2 attacks.

Some think the sequence above is legal with a missing rule for final resolution.
I thought we all agreed that the defender resolves the attacks in any order they wanted as "your opponent can allocate the attack one at a time, making the saving throws and suffering damage each time as appropriate." Seems quite clear to me.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 06:55:49


Post by: Jidmah


 DeathReaper wrote:
"In order to make several attacks at once..."

There is your timing. you determine the conditions at that point, not after.


I suggest you go back to school and pick up some English classes. Not a single word in that quote is related to timing.

Since you dodged the question a second time, I will now consider all your arguments as made in bad faith.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 07:33:26


Post by: DeathReaper


 Jidmah wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
"In order to make several attacks at once..."

There is your timing. you determine the conditions at that point, not after.


I suggest you go back to school and pick up some English classes. Not a single word in that quote is related to timing.

Since you dodged the question a second time, I will now consider all your arguments as made in bad faith.
I am not arguing in bad faith.

I did not dodge any questions.

And don't break rule #5, that's not okay.

"In order to make several attacks at once..." is a timing issue. This happens at a point in time. Why do you think it does not?

It happens before you make attacks for a unit.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 08:10:34


Post by: Jidmah


 DeathReaper wrote:
It happens before you make attacks for a unit.


Oh, another bad faith argument. Prove it or feth off. Don't try hide behind the tenets you are violating yourself.

Also answer the question. I know you refuse to do so because it proves your argument wrong.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 08:10:36


Post by: U02dah4


JakeSiren wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
The last step is where we have a minor rules breakdown as there is no guidance on how to order the D1 and D2 attacks.

Some think the sequence above is legal with a missing rule for final resolution.
I thought we all agreed that the defender resolves the attacks in any order they wanted as "your opponent can allocate the attack one at a time, making the saving throws and suffering damage each time as appropriate." Seems quite clear to me.


Absolutely not the defender can allocate the damage values in either order but cannot oscillate between them


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 08:12:42


Post by: Jidmah


U02dah4 wrote:
Absolutely not the defender can allocate the damage values in either order but cannot oscillate between them


Care to quote the rule supporting that?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 08:24:42


Post by: U02dah4


RAW There is no answer its not covered



RAW you can fast roll if they are the same so you can fast roll future values is irrelevant all that matters is they are the same now D3D is the same across attacks regardless of what that value may be. And extra D on 6s to wound is the same up until you roll a 6.



When it comes to allocation it doesn't specify how to resolve different damage values. The only evidence is the rulling on MW. The clear assumption in the way the rules are written is that at this point you are dealing with only one type of A

So it is a RAI argument useing the same logic used in the allocation of D that also causes MW

You can't mix the D and MW to the defenders advantage you have to do all damage then all mw

And RAI that same logic says you can't mix 1 and 2 damages you have to resolve 1 then the other

Secondly it's just sporting its clear intention behind the allocation and fast rolling rules was that you can't manipulate mixing of damages otherwise you wouldn't have slow rolling you would just roll all attacks together and the defender would allocate damages to their advantage

If the defender objects as they feel disadvantaged the only fair way to deal is for all dice to be rolled singularly on the defenders clock time as singular rolling wastes clock time and the defender is being unsporting by trying to grub an advantage


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 08:35:08


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
The last step is where we have a minor rules breakdown as there is no guidance on how to order the D1 and D2 attacks.

Some think the sequence above is legal with a missing rule for final resolution.
I thought we all agreed that the defender resolves the attacks in any order they wanted as "your opponent can allocate the attack one at a time, making the saving throws and suffering damage each time as appropriate." Seems quite clear to me.


Absolutely not the defender can allocate the damage values in either order but cannot oscillate between them

Rules quote? Hint: the idea of resolving 1-damage then 2-damage attacks (or other way around) is made up, you don't get to dictate how your opponent allocates the attack one at a time.

The problem with your approach is obvious, if you chose to fast roll Bloodletters rather than slow rolling then it greatly benefits you vs certain targets. For example, let's say 8 attacks successfully wound vs Intercessors. 4 x 1 damage, 4 x 2 damage. Let's assume we fail all saves. If we resolve all 1-damage attacks first, then all 2-damage attacks, that results in 6 dead Intercessors. If we alternate between 1-damage first then 2-damage, it results in 4 dead Intercessors.

If you care about the order of attacks then you should slow roll. Otherwise it is 100% up to your opponent as per the fast rolling rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote:
If the defender objects as they feel disadvantaged the only fair way to deal is for all dice to be rolled singularly on the defenders clock time as singular rolling wastes clock time and the defender is being unsporting by trying to grub an advantage

Bwahahah, see above about Bloodletters vs Intercessors. The attacker is being unsporting by trying to grub an advantage they are not entitled to.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 08:47:48


Post by: U02dah4


As stated its a RAI argument based on their being no RAW

Centered on

1) the intention of the rules to result in only one type of damage at the allocation step

2) how MW and D dealt at the same time have been addressed because this is clear and is the only similar situation that has been clarified.

3) You can RAW claim that the defender allocates A to models. As you do. However, It nowhere specifies that the defender gets to choose which order those A are resolved in. You assume its the defender because they allocate the wound to a model but you could equally argue the attacker presents one successful wound at a time and the defender allocates it this would make it the Attackers choice. RAW we don't know it's not covered in the rules so we have to go to RAI see points 1) and 2)



Your argument relates to outcome which is really a RAI argument and a poor one with no evidence.

Sure I will concede in certain situations it can benefit the attacker. Therefore resolving it differently benefits the defender. That is not a RAI argument for either outcome as you are just highlighting that it creates a difference and then arbitrarily argueing this supports your preference. Personally any attempt by the attacker or defender to mix D values goes against RAI and is an unsporting attempt to gain an advantage. Resolving all of one type, then the other minimises advantage to either player.



The defender should resolve 1 type of D at a time RAI. You cannot force your opponent to slow roll and waste their time. so if the defender wants it slow rolled a sporting player should allow this but only on the defenders time to prevent requests based on wasting clock time. If your not playing on clocks or time isn't an issue a sporting player should just slow roll if their opponent requests.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 09:39:20


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4, can you drop the invented rules? Let's follow the RAW in this situation:
BRB Fast Rolling wrote:(after fast rolling the attacks)
Your opponent can then allocate the attack one at a time, making the saving throws and suffering damage each time as appropriate. Remember, if the target unit contains a model that has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, they must allocate further attacks to this model until either it is destroyed, or all of the attacks have been saved or resolved.
The rules don't care which attack you resolve (they are rolled simultaneously after all), as long as you resolve them one at a time. The person who gets to allocate the attacks one at a time is the opponent.

So let's look at this, we have a pool of 4 1-damage attacks, and 4 2-damage attacks vs Intercessors.

The opponent allocates one attack, in this case they chose a 1-damage attack (because they are the one who gets to allocate), makes the saving throw then suffers the damage as appropriate.
The opponent allocates the next attack, in this case they chose a 2-damage attack (because they are the one who gets to allocate), makes the saving throw then suffers the damage as appropriate.
The opponent allocates the next attack, in this case they chose a 1-damage attack (because they are the one who gets to allocate), makes the saving throw then suffers the damage as appropriate.
And so on. This is 100% within the rules as written.

Your RAI argument "the intention of the rules to result in only one type of damage at the allocation step" indicates that the attacker broke the intention by fast rolling attacks that they knew would violate this intention. Maybe you wouldn't be arguing about this if the attacker didn't break the intention of the rules?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 09:59:29


Post by: U02dah4


Would you stop inventing rules I'm not inventing any I'm saying there are none so you go to RAI

they are only given permission to allocate the
attack to a model not choose the damage value or characterstocs of that attack because the sequence predisposes that they are the same at this point RAW it isn't covered - the order of the 8 A isn't mentioned because they are supposed to be the same

So you go to RAI

You could equally argue I give you 4 1 damage attacks to allocate then 4 two damage attacks to allocate not 8 attacks in any order we don't know it's not mentioned.


It does not indicate the attacker broke the intention - it indicates that the RAW has a hole in it creating an unprovable situation - so we go to RAI at the point the rules break- neither player is at fault for the break itself.

it is clearly intended that one type of D is resolved at a time. You can fast role RAW as the D is not different at that point.

The problem kicks in when you have 2 types of D and no instruction on how to order them under RAW. The only breaking of intention is if the defender tries to order them to their advantage by mixing D.

We can see the fix for D and MW and that seems the most balanced fix for both parties and the most likely RAI

D is now different so split into two types of A resolve one then the other same as D and MW.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 10:12:07


Post by: JakeSiren


You made a very good point before, that I want to emphasis, "the intention of the rules to result in only one type of damage at the allocation step"

The attacker, choosing to fast roll the Bloodletter attacks ignores this intention. Your solution, asking the defender to honour the intention even though the attacker hasn't, is daft.

Maybe we can agree that the attacker shouldn't fast roll Bloodletter attacks so we don't get into a broken game state? If they do, then the defender has no obligation to honour the intention that the attacker dismissed.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 10:19:56


Post by: U02dah4


The attacker hasn't broken intention because at every point they have correctly followed RAW and while they are in control of things it is clear they can do that.

The point at which the rule breaks is at the point between successful wound and allocation.

There is no RAW for Attacker or defender when it comes to ordering different D.

If the defender resolves one type of D at a time they are following RAI.

If they mix they are breaking RAI to gain an advantage.

Yes I expect the defender to honour RAI as I expect the attacker to - but convention is you go to RAI based answers only at the point the RAW breaks not before and the RAW hasn't broken when the attacker is fast rolling ot breaks after it.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 10:26:48


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
The attacker hasn't broken intention because at every point they have correctly followed RAW and while they are in control of things it is clear they can do that.

The point at which it breaks is at the point between successful wound and allocation

There is no RAW for Attacker or defender when it comes to ordering different D

If the defender resolves one type of D at a time they are following RAI

If they mix they are breaking RAI to gain an advantage
The attacker knows that they have rules that result in more than one type of damage at the allocation step. They have the option of slow rolling which doesn't result in more than one type of damage at the allocation step.

If they fast roll knowing this then it is 100% the attackers fault that the intention of "one type of damage at the allocation step" has been broken! With that intention broken, the defender is not beholden to it. Simple.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 12:02:14


Post by: U02dah4


They have the perfectly valid option of fast rolling.

No it is neither players fault the rules have a gap

The attacker is free to do either

The defender is creating a problem where one does not need to exist if they dont follow RAI and should just follow the RAI

I have seen dozens of players resolve this at tournaments without hassle

I have seen noone try and mix damages to their advantage and if they do they know they are being unsporting to gain an advantage they shouldn't have.

That the other player could have prevented the situation is neither here nor there


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 12:13:10


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
They have the perfectly valid option of fast rolling.

No it is neither players fault the rules have a gap

The attacker is free to do either

The defender is creating a problem where one does not need to exist if they dont follow RAI and should just follow the RAI

I have seen dozens of players resolve this at tournaments without hassle

I have seen noone try and mix damages to their advantage and if they do they know they are being unsporting to gain an advantage they shouldn't have.

That the other player could have prevented the situation is neither here nor there
You can't have it both ways, either both players accept that the intent exists and take actions to ensure it remains intact (ie, attacker doesn't create a situation of multiple types of damage in the allocation step by fast rolling), or neither player accepts that the intent exists, and the defender can allocate the attacks in whatever order as they see fit since the rules don't dictate an order, just that they are resolved one at a time.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 12:23:19


Post by: U02dah4


No players have to follow the RAW until RAW doesn't work then and only then go to intent

RAW is clear till allocation then as you admit there is no rule for ordering so we go to intent and allocate one type of damage at a time.

The attacker is under no obligation to take Pre-emptive action to stop a fault occurring if they were they would just not field that unit

Both players are responsible for maintaining RAI once RAW breaks and in this case it means the defender doesn't mix D

Any other answer involves the defender creating an unfair situation against RAI to gain an advantage when they do not need to do so. Or the attacker doing the same. They could just be a sportsman/normal competative player and role all of one type of damage first

You know what was intended you just seem to be of the mindset that your opponent could have prevented the situation from occurring so it's ok to cheat by breaking RAI because you technically can even though you know its not the intent. Either way that behaviour would deserve a yellow card.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 12:36:30


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
No players have to follow the RAW until RAW doesn't work then and only then go to intent

RAW is clear till allocation then as you admit there is no rule for ordering so we go to intent and allocate one type of damage at a time.

The attacker is under no obligation to take Pre-emptive action to stop a fault occurring if they were they would just not field that unit

Both players are responsible for maintaining RAI once RAW breaks and in this case it means the defender doesn't mix D

Any other answer involves the defender creating an unfair situation against RAI to gain an advantage when they do not need to do so. They could just be a sportsman/normal competative player and role all of one type of damage first
RAW is actually clear. The defender allocates attacks one at a time, in the same way that a player selects one unit in their army to move at a time, or selecting a psyker to cast powers at a time, etc etc. The rules don't specify order because it's up to the player to decide on the order. You want to claim "intention" but don't want to apply it equally.

And don't come at me with the BS "defender creating an unfair situation", because in Bloodletters vs Intercessors, it unfairly optimises the Bloodletter Attacks the way you want to do it. How about the attacker doesn't create an unfair situation in the first place and slow-roll it properly if they are so concerned about fairness?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 12:44:15


Post by: U02dah4


No rules don't specify order

That's it that's why there's a fault the situation isn't considered. You get to allocate the attack to the model not specify the order of those attacks because the rules think that doesn't matter.

Imagine 2 damage and 1 damage attacks going into 3w model

The attacker wants a 2 damage till 1 succeeds then a 1 damage attack then back to 2 damage

The defender wants 2 one damage attacks then a 2 damage attacks

Neither player optimally wants all 2 then all1 or vice versa

The principle is the same across all situations this occurs in but certain situations like the intercessor scenario can favour one side

The attacker didn't create an unfair situation the person trying to mix damage rolls is and the person trying to mix damage rolls can choose not to do that.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 12:58:40


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
No rules don't specify order

That's it that's why there's a fault the situation isn't considered. You get to allocate the attack to the model not specify the order of those attacks because the rules think that doesn't matter.

Imagine 2 damage and 1 damage attacks going into 3w model

The attacker wants a 2 damage till 1 succeeds then a 1 damage attack then back to 2 damage

The defender wants 2 one damage attacks then a 2 damage attacks

Neither player optimally wants all 2 then all1 or vice versa

The attacker didn't create an unfair situation the person trying to mix damage rolls is and the person trying to mix damage rolls can choose not to do that.
It doesn't matter, it's still going to be unfair to one of the players in many circumstances. Replace Bloodletters with Incubi (2d attacks going up to 3d) vs 3W and you've got the same problem. What if instead I told you that the attacker could create a fair situation for both players? That doesn't artificially increase or decrease the effectiveness of a weapon! Do you want to know how?
Spoiler:
The attacker slow rolls the dice


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 13:03:05


Post by: U02dah4


If your situation involves mandating not fast rolling that is not fair it unfairly penalises the clock of the attacker. And against the RAW prevents a legal action the attacker could take. If it is only optional the attacker may do either



I agree different situations may favour one side or the other

My point is it is not a choice and whether it favours the defender or attacker mixing is not RAI. You need to resolve all of one type

That the attacker could have prevented the situation has no bearing on how it resolves when it does. it does not give you permission to cheat and you know you are cheating because you know its not intended

It can also be impractical and detrimental to the fun of the game imagine it happening across 12 units it would take forever to slow role them and their is no need if the defender plays by the RAI and is sporting. Both players will have more fun and that situation can easily happen with +1 ap on 6's to wound.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 13:14:07


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
If your situation involves mandating not fast rolling that is not fair it unfairly penalises the clock of the attacker. And against the RAW prevents a legal action the attacker could take. If it is only optional the attacker may do witherm



I agree different situations may favour one side or the other

My point is it is not a choice and whether it favours the defender or not RAI it's all of one type
Clock's aren't in the game rules, I don't care about them.

Here's where we are at. We agree that fast rolling these attacks put the game in a state that isn't cleanly resolved because the defender now has to allocate attacks which are a mix of 1 and 2 damage. You think the RAW is unclear but there is RAI to group them. I think the RAW is clear and that the defender allocates as they see fit (no order specified = player chooses as demonstrated in other sections of BRB).

Consider this, does the attacker even meet the requirements for fast rolling these attacks? I would say no, because as I outlined above, fast rolling these attacks puts the game into an unclean state. The attacker cannot meet the guarantee that attacks must inflict the same damage (which happens after defender allocates) - and the attacker knows they can't because they might have 1 damage or 2 damage attacks when it comes to allocating them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote:
It can also be impractical and detrimental to the fun of the game imagine it happening across 12 units it would take forever to slow role them and their is no need if the defender plays by the RAI and is sporting. Both players will have more fun and that situation can easily happen with +1 ap on 6's to wound.
For reference, whenever I play my Bloodletters I fast roll them, but I also allow my opponent to resolve their saves however they want. That is a concession I make to complete the game in a timely manner. It's up to my opponent how they want to resolve the attacks, but they shouldn't be penalised for me wanting to speed up my armies quirky rules. *That's* not fair to them.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 14:01:06


Post by: U02dah4


We don't agree fast rolling doesn't put the game in a state that isn't cleanly resolved unless the defender decides to mix D

Does the attacker meet the requirement yes otherwise you could never fast role any variable damage weapon

I've seen dozens of tourney players happily navigate this situation with fast rolling and no problems and it comes up regularly.

Truth is your trying to justify cheating and you know it. I also know in any tourney situation you would get slapped down by a good TO. Outside that if your gonna WAAC that's up to you. You can try and justify it all you want I know it's against RAI and you both know it's against RAI and that your opponent gives you the opportunity to cheat doesn't mean you should cheat.

I also use the mtg definition of cheating because its pretty good here. If you know your doing something against the rules to gain an advantage its cheating. So if you know RAW doesnt cover it and its against RAI to mix damages and you do the term fits.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 14:18:18


Post by: JakeSiren


I disagree that it's RAI. RAI would be to avoid the situation in the first place by slow rolling.

Here's a situation that you haven't yet considered under your "RAI".

Situation: Fast rolling Bloodletters vs Intercessors in order to maximise damage to Intercessors.

Then, later in the game slow rolling vs Gravis (3w) because you know that bundling fast rolling attacks would result in damage wastage.

In short, the attacker gets to maximise when they get an advantage and minimise when they have disadvantage.

But you just want to justify gaining an unfair advantage and cheating (under your definition) as the attacker.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 14:44:20


Post by: U02dah4


In the first case the player is within the RAW has not broken the rules so its fine

In the second case the player is within the RAW has not broken the rules so its fine it is worth noting if playing with clocks there is a drawback of lost time.

The rules allow you to do these things it is not cheating to gain an advantage by useing the rules as written

It is not cheating if the rules have a hole in them and you have to go to RAI to resolve the situation

It is cheating having had to go to RAI because the RAW has a hole to then knowingly break RAI in order to gain an advantage

You have cited a disproportionate advantage not an unfair one and certainly none that involve cheating, the rules for the interaction are broken and need resolving with RAI the player is not breaking the rules deliberately


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 14:49:08


Post by: alextroy


I think you two are now talking in circles. Your POVs are clear but diametrically opposed. Is there any point in continuing the back and forth?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 15:03:58


Post by: DeathReaper


 Jidmah wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
It happens before you make attacks for a unit.


Oh, another bad faith argument. Prove it or feth off.
I have proven it, I do not know why you think I have not. I do not understand how you think it is a bad faith argument when I have provided multiple rules quotes to back my position.
Don't try hide behind the tenets you are violating yourself.
I have not, please stop with the personal attacks.
Also answer the question. I know you refuse to do so because it proves your argument wrong.
Not that your question is relevant, and just to be clear you asked "DeathReaper, does the model targeted by the attack lose one or two wounds?" correct?

The answer to that is, at the point in time in which you determine if you can fast roll, the bloodletters do 1 damage so a model would lose 1 wound. This is listed right on the Bloodletter Dataslate.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 15:07:27


Post by: JakeSiren


@U02dah4
Do you think it is rules as intended that one player can get an unfair advantage over the other by fast rolling instead of slow rolling in certain circumstances? Because that seems to be what you want to allow.

I would certainly think that the rules as intended for fast rolling is that it's used only when it would produce the same outcome as slow rolling. Fast rolling any other time is cheating.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 15:15:13


Post by: U02dah4


Rules work in such a way that players gain an advantage all the time. That's Is not unfair its a function of differential impacts of rules.

It is a plausible hypothesis that is the rules as intended for fast rolling however, ....

We only go to RAI at the point the RAW breaks. Before that it doesnt matter. RAW hasn't broken at the point you decide to fast role so RAI doesn't matter at that point only RAW.

RAI matters at the point the RAW breaks and we try to resolve it at that point by RAI only because we can't by RAW.

RAW and when you cant use RAW- RAI outcomes are not always equally beneficial but they are the rules you don't get tobpick and choose when to apply them (unless they say you do)


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 19:06:24


Post by: Jidmah


 DeathReaper wrote:
The answer to that is, at the point in time in which you determine if you can fast roll, the bloodletters do 1 damage so a model would lose 1 wound. This is listed right on the Bloodletter Dataslate.


So a model targeted by a bloodletter attack will never lose 2 wounds from that attack?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 21:04:39


Post by: JohnnyHell


U02dah4 wrote:
Rules work in such a way that players gain an advantage all the time. That's Is not unfair its a function of differential impacts of rules.

It is a plausible hypothesis that is the rules as intended for fast rolling however, ....

We only go to RAI at the point the RAW breaks. Before that it doesnt matter. RAW hasn't broken at the point you decide to fast role so RAI doesn't matter at that point only RAW.

RAI matters at the point the RAW breaks and we try to resolve it at that point by RAI only because we can't by RAW.

RAW and when you cant use RAW- RAI outcomes are not always equally beneficial but they are the rules you don't get tobpick and choose when to apply them (unless they say you do)


Made you gonna give this speech in every thread to try and lend false credibility to your arguments?


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 21:20:59


Post by: U02dah4


I long for the thread when we don't have people guessing at RAI for no reason and making questions more complex than they need to be it would negate the need to reiterate this so often but it underpins all rules arguments if you don't get it you won't get the right answers


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 21:52:04


Post by: nosferatu1001


Fast rolling in this situation is proven to be against the rules. The attacks DO NOT inflict the same damage. They inflict either 1 or 2 damage.
So if the attacker wants to br3ak the rules for the sake of a non interminable game, they don't get to take an advantage at allocation as well

U02 your argument of rai is dismissed, as you broke raw to get there.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 22:30:19


Post by: U02dah4


They are not 1 or 2 the rules care about damage value of the weapon not the outcome

You can argue it should care about the outcome

Raw it does not if it did none of the arguments would be made1


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/21 23:43:55


Post by: nosferatu1001


Did you ignore the rule stating the damage char Of the weapon is 2? I quoted it above

As it appears you did, thanks for confirming that the rules care about the fact the damage value of the weapon is one OR two, meaning they don't inflict the same damage, which is required.

Raw is proven.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 00:33:17


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
Rules work in such a way that players gain an advantage all the time. That's Is not unfair its a function of differential impacts of rules.

It is a plausible hypothesis that is the rules as intended for fast rolling however, ....

We only go to RAI at the point the RAW breaks. Before that it doesnt matter. RAW hasn't broken at the point you decide to fast role so RAI doesn't matter at that point only RAW.

RAI matters at the point the RAW breaks and we try to resolve it at that point by RAI only because we can't by RAW.

RAW and when you cant use RAW- RAI outcomes are not always equally beneficial but they are the rules you don't get tobpick and choose when to apply them (unless they say you do)
The fast rolling rules are there to speed up gameplay for when attack order doesn't matter. Knowing this, you can do things such as fast-roll weapons with different characteristics when it doesn't affect the outcome. For example, fast rolling S4 and S5 weapons vs a T3 target together. (both wounding on a 3+). Or rolling weapons with differing AP because the enemy is only using an Invuln save. People extend this understanding when fast rolling saves even though the game rules don't allow you to!

There are rules to give players an advantage, but the fast rolling rules aren't those rules. They exist to speed up game play. If you are getting a game play advantage from fast rolling, then you aren't using them correctly.

Here's what I think. If we get to the point of resolving fast-rolled attacks and we have a mix of 1 or 2 damage attacks, then the attacker hasn't used the fast roll rules correctly. They should give concessions to their opponent to avoid any unfair advantage. I think the best way is to do a bald face reading of the rules: The defender can allocate each attack one at a time. No qualifiers as to how, it is their decision.

If you want a fair way to fast-roll Bloodletter attacks, then discuss a method with your opponent pre-game. You could agree that attacks are allocated from left to right, or that you roll a 4+ to see if you are going to take a 1-damage attack or 2-damage attack, or maybe you play a quick round of rock paper scissors to see who chooses the next attack to be resolved, or however you and your opponent find agreeable.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 04:09:45


Post by: tneva82


U02dah4 wrote:
If you just make rules up you have no consistency across forums/games it is therefore not relevant to a rules forum

Fast-rolling saves is a ubiquitous practice

it is not made up


So your version results in every game with eldar unplayable raw as rules don't cover how to deal this with fast rolling. You get to damage allocation phase...but beyond that rules don'' cover as order matters but you don"t know.

Put game on hold forerer

Anyway you are flat out wrong(no surprise there). Fast rolling raw can't be used here. Common house rule for efficiency but if we want to talk about correct rules a) can't be used here b) would literally put game to likely infinite pause(gw unlikely to do anything to this until edition changes)


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 07:23:33


Post by: U02dah4


Well you clearly haven't read anything I've written on here - use RAW till you can't go to rai afterthat. That doesn't mean just guess because good rai is evidenced based and we have that here. There no need to guess in 99% of situations


Automatically Appended Next Post:
JakeSiren wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
Rules work in such a way that players gain an advantage all the time. That's Is not unfair its a function of differential impacts of rules.

It is a plausible hypothesis that is the rules as intended for fast rolling however, ....

We only go to RAI at the point the RAW breaks. Before that it doesnt matter. RAW hasn't broken at the point you decide to fast role so RAI doesn't matter at that point only RAW.

RAI matters at the point the RAW breaks and we try to resolve it at that point by RAI only because we can't by RAW.

RAW and when you cant use RAW- RAI outcomes are not always equally beneficial but they are the rules you don't get tobpick and choose when to apply them (unless they say you do)
The fast rolling rules are there to speed up gameplay for when attack order doesn't matter. Knowing this, you can do things such as fast-roll weapons with different characteristics when it doesn't affect the outcome. For example, fast rolling S4 and S5 weapons vs a T3 target together. (both wounding on a 3+). Or rolling weapons with differing AP because the enemy is only using an Invuln save. People extend this understanding when fast rolling saves even though the game rules don't allow you to!

There are rules to give players an advantage, but the fast rolling rules aren't those rules. They exist to speed up game play. If you are getting a game play advantage from fast rolling, then you aren't using them correctly.

Here's what I think. If we get to the point of resolving fast-rolled attacks and we have a mix of 1 or 2 damage attacks, then the attacker hasn't used the fast roll rules correctly. They should give concessions to their opponent to avoid any unfair advantage. I think the best way is to do a bald face reading of the rules: The defender can allocate each attack one at a time. No qualifiers as to how, it is their decision.

If you want a fair way to fast-roll Bloodletter attacks, then discuss a method with your opponent pre-game. You could agree that attacks are allocated from left to right, or that you roll a 4+ to see if you are going to take a 1-damage attack or 2-damage attack, or maybe you play a quick round of rock paper scissors to see who chooses the next attack to be resolved, or however you and your opponent find agreeable.


See this us the crux of it you want "concessions" from your opponent because you've perceived they have created the situation. Your "concessions" are an unfair advantage going against RAI.

You dared to do what your allowed to do but I don't like the outcome because it helps you therefore you must be punished

Your then misrepresenting put a veneer of niceness saying "your avoiding unfair advantage" but your creating unfair advantage and you know that because your useing the words "concessions"

The neutral way is to resolve all of one type as you would in any other situation, It remains the most unbiased way of dealing with it but no it is not always equal outcomed but it is as close as you can get and you know that is as close to RAI as you can get.

And if you want it slow rolled you can ask but you need to spend your clock time because your time wasting the difference in outcomes between assigning all of one type and slow rolling is minimal. Your just trying to maximise the difference in your favour by mixing.

Trying to grub "concessions" out of your opponent that you know is against RAI is WAAC however you try and justify it.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 07:54:55


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
Well you clearly haven't read anything I've written on here - use RAW till you can't go to rai afterthat. That doesn't mean just guess because good rai is evidenced based and we have that here. There no need to guess in 99% of situations


Automatically Appended Next Post:
JakeSiren wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
Rules work in such a way that players gain an advantage all the time. That's Is not unfair its a function of differential impacts of rules.

It is a plausible hypothesis that is the rules as intended for fast rolling however, ....

We only go to RAI at the point the RAW breaks. Before that it doesnt matter. RAW hasn't broken at the point you decide to fast role so RAI doesn't matter at that point only RAW.

RAI matters at the point the RAW breaks and we try to resolve it at that point by RAI only because we can't by RAW.

RAW and when you cant use RAW- RAI outcomes are not always equally beneficial but they are the rules you don't get tobpick and choose when to apply them (unless they say you do)
The fast rolling rules are there to speed up gameplay for when attack order doesn't matter. Knowing this, you can do things such as fast-roll weapons with different characteristics when it doesn't affect the outcome. For example, fast rolling S4 and S5 weapons vs a T3 target together. (both wounding on a 3+). Or rolling weapons with differing AP because the enemy is only using an Invuln save. People extend this understanding when fast rolling saves even though the game rules don't allow you to!

There are rules to give players an advantage, but the fast rolling rules aren't those rules. They exist to speed up game play. If you are getting a game play advantage from fast rolling, then you aren't using them correctly.

Here's what I think. If we get to the point of resolving fast-rolled attacks and we have a mix of 1 or 2 damage attacks, then the attacker hasn't used the fast roll rules correctly. They should give concessions to their opponent to avoid any unfair advantage. I think the best way is to do a bald face reading of the rules: The defender can allocate each attack one at a time. No qualifiers as to how, it is their decision.

If you want a fair way to fast-roll Bloodletter attacks, then discuss a method with your opponent pre-game. You could agree that attacks are allocated from left to right, or that you roll a 4+ to see if you are going to take a 1-damage attack or 2-damage attack, or maybe you play a quick round of rock paper scissors to see who chooses the next attack to be resolved, or however you and your opponent find agreeable.


See this us the crux of it you want "concessions" from your opponent because you've perceived they have created the situation. Your "concessions" are an unfair advantage going against RAI.

You dared to do what your allowed to do but I don't like the outcome because it helps you therefore you must be punished

Your then misrepresenting put a veneer of niceness saying "your avoiding unfair advantage" but your creating unfair advantage and you know that because your useing the words "concessions"

The neutral way is to resolve all of one type as you would in any other situation, It remains the most unbiased way of dealing with it but no it is not always equal outcomed but it is as close as you can get and you know that is as close to RAI as you can get.

And if you want it slow rolled you can ask but you need to spend your clock time because your time wasting the difference in outcomes between assigning all of one type and slow rolling is minimal. Your just trying to maximise the difference in your favour by mixing.

Trying to grub "concessions" out of your opponent that you know is against RAI is WAAC however you try and justify it.
No, it's not a misrepresentation to claim the attacker is getting an unfair advantage. If you pile all of your Bloodletter attacks into a unit of Intercessors and fast roll, then declare that your opponent must resolve all of the 2-damage attacks together, and all of the 1-damage attacks together, it reduces damage wastage to 0% and can result in up-to 50% more dead Intercessors than otherwise possible. If you slow roll, then you have a chance of damage wastage. Are you honestly saying that you think the fast roll rules exist to allow an attacker to minimise their damage wastage?

Also, your "RAI" is unsubstantiated. All I've asked for is to use a bald-faced reading of the rules, and you reject it because you don't like the outcome. The Rules As Written work correctly, just not in the way you want them to.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 08:20:27


Post by: nosferatu1001


U02 and yet as proven , you are breaking raw when you fast roll blooodletter attacks.
So you spend the attackers clock time slow rolling, as you are nit permitted to fast, or for the sake of not having a crap slow game you fast roll but allow damage allocation one attack at a time as the rules say, by defenders choice. Done.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 09:32:23


Post by: U02dah4


Jakesiren your not trying to remedy the session in the fairest way your trying to get "concessions" and that's WAAC

If that's what your gonna do its what's your gonna do, but your not going to convince me your trying to do anything else because I know you know the reasonable position and the RAI and you know you know the reasonable RAI but you want to maximise your advantage thats all your argument is.

I also know any TO worth there salt will slap you down so cheat if you want to in your home game.

As to nosferatu had you proven noone else would be talking since you haven't proven I'll ignore the rest as noone has broken RAW in the scenario that is cheating the RAW doesn't cover a situation that is 100% different and we go to RAI at the break.

The attacker may choose to spend their time slow rolling it is at their discretion you spend your time how you want to but they are not obligated to do so. If you wish to force another player to slow roll when they dont have to you spend your time to do so.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 09:47:42


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
Jakesiren your not trying to remedy the session in the fairest way your trying to get "concessions" and that's WAAC
JakeSiren wrote:
If you want a fair way to fast-roll Bloodletter attacks, then discuss a method with your opponent pre-game. You could agree that attacks are allocated from left to right, or that you roll a 4+ to see if you are going to take a 1-damage attack or 2-damage attack, or maybe you play a quick round of rock paper scissors to see who chooses the next attack to be resolved, or however you and your opponent find agreeable.
I already told you the fairest way to fast roll Bloodletters. Discuss with your opponent pre-game and decide on what you both think is equitable - you are already house ruling by allowing Bloodletters to fast roll in the first place.
U02dah4 wrote:
If that's what your gonna do its what's your gonna do, but your not going to convince me your trying to do anything else because I know you know the reasonable position and the RAI and you know you know the reasonable RAI but you want to maximise your advantage thats all your argument is.

I also know any TO worth there salt will slap you down so cheat if you want to in your home game.
Where is your evidence that the rules break in this circumstance? Assuming such evidence exists, you then need to provide additional evidence of what you consider RAI (you have not). Right now you are throwing a tantrum because I pointed out the very real advantage that the attacker would receive by going against the intentions of the fast roll rule and playing it the way you want.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 11:17:53


Post by: U02dah4


Go back two pages the evidence was summarised clearly there is no rule for ordering damage at allocation as the rule assumes their identical ergo it breaks. the defender doesn't have permission to choose order only allocate to a model

I then cited

1) the intention of the rules to result in only one type of damage at the allocation step (so this would indicate we resolve all of one type together)

2) how MW and D dealt at the same time have been addressed because this is clear and is a virtually identical situation and has been clarified (you do all of one then all of the other shocker)

As evidence for how to handle RAI at the breaking point

Ergo one type of damage resolved followed by the other is the RAI answer.

As usual you only address RAI at the breaking point not before

The outcome is irrelevant to consideration of RAI as the same rule in different combination of units change outcome and there is no 100% perfect compromise in a situations.

Anything predating the break is irrelevant because we are still ar raw at that point.

This answer is consistent unlike the WAAC answer of I can order it however I like to gain an unfair advantage. E.g. if we swapped the target to 3 wound gravis I would still be saying all of 1 then all of the other. Your order would magically change to optimise it for yourself.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 11:36:52


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
Go back two pages the evidence was summarised clearly there is no rule for ordering damage at alocation as the rule assumes their identical ergo it breaks

I then cited

1) the intention of the rules to result in only one type of damage at the allocation step

2) how MW and D dealt at the same time have been addressed because this is clear and is the only similar situation that has been clarified

As evidence for how to handle RAI at the breaking point

Ergo one type of damage resolved followed by the other

As usual you only address RAI at the breaking point not before

The outcome is irrelevant and doesn't change whether the target is intercessors or gravis

Nonsense, that doesn't break the rule. For reference: There's no rule telling me which unit to shoot with first. There is no rule telling me which unit to move first. There is no rule telling me which weapon to shoot with first. There is no rule telling me which unit to charge with first. Etc etc.

None of these rules (including the fast rolling rule) care about order. Therefore it's up to the player who has the agency to make up their mind on the order they want to action. For allocation, it is explicitly the defender.

U02dah4 wrote:
The outcome is irrelevant to consideration of RAI as the same rule in different combination of units change outcome and there is no 100% perfect compromise in a situations.

This answer is consistent unlike the WAAC answer of I can order it however I like to gain an unfair advantage. E.g. if we swapped the target to 3 wound gravis I would still be saying all of 1 then all of the other. Your order would change to optimise it for yourself
And since it seems like you are still formulating your argument with your multiple edits (12 at the moment). Don't you find it somewhat hypocritical to call me WAAC when your method literally allows the attacker to get the best advantage in all situations? Vs Intercessors they fast roll. Vs Gravis they slow roll and never fast roll. Don't pretend your method is fair when it demonstrably advantages the attacker.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 11:49:33


Post by: U02dah4


In most situations it doesn't the attacker most likely wants to mix 2 dam and 1 damage e.g. vs gravis 2+1 = dead gravis. the attacker wants to mix them to achieve this forcibly having 2+2+2+2 Is not optimal for the attacker it wastes damage just as the defender wants to maximise the wastage. Neither side is maximally advantaged by resolving one type then the other.

That you can slow role as an alternative is irrelevant and has no bearing on the RAI of how you resolve the break in RAW

Every tourney player I've ever met would fast role both of course this is anecdotal but then they just resolve one type of damage at a time


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 12:03:20


Post by: JakeSiren


U02dah4 wrote:
In most situations it doesn't the attacker most likely wants to mix 2 dam and 1 damage e.g. vs gravis 2+1 = dead gravis. the attacker wants to mix them to achieve this forcibly having 2+2+2+2 Is not optimal for the attacker it wastes damage just as the defender wants to maximise the wastage. Neither side is maximally advantaged by resolving one type then the other.

That you can slow role as an alternative is irrelevant and has no bearing on the RAI of how you resolve the break in RAW

Every tourney player I've ever met would fast role both of course this is anecdotal but then they just resolve one type of damage at a time
Possibly a valid consideration if the attacker is forced to fast roll - but surprise: they aren't. However it's irrelevant because as you say, the RAI only matters when RAW is broken. Since you haven't attempted to rebut my assertion that RAW isn't broken I assume that is because you either agree or can not. The rules have many situations where the player isn't told an explicit order, and that the order is decided by the player with agency.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 16:07:10


Post by: nosferatu1001


U02 - I did prove, you just ignored it, twice. The damage characteristic of the att k is one or two, as proven, and as such the damage inflicted is NOT the same. As such, you are forbidden from fast rollling blood letters.

Raw, that's it. Your position is laughable.


Do i decide when my opponent takes saves and which? @ 2022/05/22 17:38:42


Post by: JohnnyHell


This thread continues to be an utter farce!