Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If I didn't have a 2 year old passed out in my lap with my brb in the other room I'd demonstrate.

rigeld2 wrote:If I didn't have a 2 year old passed out in my lap with my brb in the other room I'd demonstrate.

p.8 roll a D6 for a characteristic test. Probably countless other places. I'd agree 1D6 = D6.

Wow.

The Chronometron states that a model can re-roll one of his D6 rolls per phase. That's ONE of his D6 ROLLS. The rule says nothing of 2d6 rolls, 3d6 rolls, or re-rolling part of anything.

I have no clue where you're getting anything else. In no way does the wording of the rule in the codex even begin to indicate that you are capable of re-rolling part of anything. The only thing you can re-roll is a single D6 roll.

Not a 2d6 roll. See how it has a 2 in front of the d6? That alone should clue anyone in to the fact that rolling a D6 and rolling 2d6 are different things. Besides that, the BRB very, VERY clearly states that unless a rule specifically states you are allowed re-roll part of a 2d6 or 3d6 roll, you cannot re-roll part of anything. Does the Chronometron allow part of a 2d6 to be re-rolled? No. No it does not. All it says is that the Harbinger of Eternity or his unit can re-roll any of his D6 rolls. Again, it says nothing of 2d6 rolls, part of 2d6 rolls, or anything of the sort. Until it does, you can only re-roll single D6 roll, as the Chronometron does not specify re-rolling part of 2d6 or 2d6 rolls.

Again - this is a fundamental misunderstanding of what "specific" means in a ruleset.

When you are told that it must specifically allow you to reroll 1D6 of a 2+D6 roll, that means it has to EXPLICITLY tell you that you can reroll a part of the 2D6

Being told you can reroll a D6 roll does not specify this.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Again - this is a fundamental misunderstanding of what "specific" means in a ruleset.

When you are told that it must specifically allow you to reroll 1D6 of a 2+D6 roll, that means it has to EXPLICITLY tell you that you can reroll a part of the 2D6

Being told you can reroll a D6 roll does not specify this.

If it said "the rule must explicitly specify the number of dice rolled and the number of dice to reroll, else reroll all" then yes. It does not.

The p.2 BRB rule says you must specify. Specifying the number of dice (one) or specifying the number of dice and the original number of dice (one out of two) are both "specifying" a different number than the original.

You don't get to decide what "otherwise specified" means and arbitrarily decide "not different enough" when the only requirement is that something different than the original roll must be stated in the rule.

This is a matter of logic. B and C are both specifically different than A, you can't just decide only C is different.

Not to contribute so little, but is there anything in 40k currently that lets us just reroll one dice as Nemesor wants to? just to see if we can find the language that would entail.

ND - it must specify something in relation to the restriction you are trying to overcome.

Same as EL doesnt specify that Sweeping Advance is ignored, meaning EL doesnt work against SA, you are allowed to reroll 1 D6 roll but nothing specifies anything about multiple D6 rules

As said, you are misunderstanding what is meant by Specify as it pertains to a rules discussion

nosferatu1001 wrote:ND - it must specify something in relation to the restriction you are trying to overcome.

Same as EL doesnt specify that Sweeping Advance is ignored, meaning EL doesnt work against SA, you are allowed to reroll 1 D6 roll but nothing specifies anything about multiple D6 rules

As said, you are misunderstanding what is meant by Specify as it pertains to a rules discussion

The restriction is that when rolling 2D6, or 3D6, chronometron specifies re-roll 1D6. Your understanding of "Specify" is your personal interpretation that you choose to impose on this discussion. You're reading requirements into the word "specify" that simply are not there regarding English language and how it is used to interpret these rules.

Here's an example ." Always roll 2D6 or 3D6 unless specified otherwise. "
Example rule: "Roll 1d6."

You see, that's "specifying otherwise". No need to mention what day it was, what the original roll was, or anything else. It still qualifies as "specifically otherwise".

Correction. Chronometron tells you to re-roll 1 1d6 roll.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:ND - it must specify something in relation to the restriction you are trying to overcome.

Same as EL doesnt specify that Sweeping Advance is ignored, meaning EL doesnt work against SA, you are allowed to reroll 1 D6 roll but nothing specifies anything about multiple D6 rules

As said, you are misunderstanding what is meant by Specify as it pertains to a rules discussion

The restriction is that when rolling 2D6, or 3D6, chronometron specifies re-roll 1D6. Your understanding of "Specify" is your personal interpretation that you choose to impose on this discussion. You're reading requirements into the word "specify" that simply are not there regarding English language and how it is used to interpret these rules.

Here's an example ." Always roll 2D6 or 3D6 unless specified otherwise. "
Example rule: "Roll 1d6."

You see, that's "specifying otherwise". No need to mention what day it was, what the original roll was, or anything else. It still qualifies as "specifically otherwise".

Seriously? That is not an example in any way. The chronometron specifies re-rolling a D6 roll. Until the codex magically changes its wording to say "the harbinger of eternity or his unit can re-roll any of his D6 rolls or part of any 2d6 or 3d6 rolls" you cannot re-roll part of anything, and he may only re-roll rolls that cosisted of only one D6, such as difficult terrain, to wound, to hit, etc. Read my earlier posts. I explained all of this. See that 2 in front of the d6? That should tip you off that the rolls are in fact different and the CHronometron only allows re-rolls of die where you only rolled one to begin with.

Its funny how you seem to be the only one here defending your claim, as everyone, literally everyone else has told you in several ways why you are wrong. We've said how a rule must SPECIFICALLY STATE that you may re-roll part of a 2d6 or more roll. As in, that wording (may the re-roll of one die/part of a 2d6 or 3d6 roll) must be in the rule. There is no such wording in the Chronometron wargear description. Perhaps maybe you're wrong? Have you considered that?

McNinja wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:ND - it must specify something in relation to the restriction you are trying to overcome.

Same as EL doesnt specify that Sweeping Advance is ignored, meaning EL doesnt work against SA, you are allowed to reroll 1 D6 roll but nothing specifies anything about multiple D6 rules

As said, you are misunderstanding what is meant by Specify as it pertains to a rules discussion

The restriction is that when rolling 2D6, or 3D6, chronometron specifies re-roll 1D6. Your understanding of "Specify" is your personal interpretation that you choose to impose on this discussion. You're reading requirements into the word "specify" that simply are not there regarding English language and how it is used to interpret these rules.

Here's an example ." Always roll 2D6 or 3D6 unless specified otherwise. "
Example rule: "Roll 1d6."

You see, that's "specifying otherwise". No need to mention what day it was, what the original roll was, or anything else. It still qualifies as "specifically otherwise".

Seriously? That is not an example in any way. The chronometron specifies re-rolling a D6 roll. Until the codex magically changes its wording to say "the harbinger of eternity or his unit can re-roll any of his D6 rolls or part of any 2d6 or 3d6 rolls" you cannot re-roll part of anything, and he may only re-roll rolls that cosisted of only one D6, such as difficult terrain, to wound, to hit, etc. Read my earlier posts. I explained all of this. See that 2 in front of the d6? That should tip you off that the rolls are in fact different and the CHronometron only allows re-rolls of die where you only rolled one to begin with.

Its funny how you seem to be the only one here defending your claim, as everyone, literally everyone else has told you in several ways why you are wrong. We've said how a rule must SPECIFICALLY STATE that you may re-roll part of a 2d6 or more roll. As in, that wording (may the re-roll of one die/part of a 2d6 or 3d6 roll) must be in the rule. There is no such wording in the Chronometron wargear description. Perhaps maybe you're wrong? Have you considered that?

The p2 BRB rule does not require "part of any 2d6 and 3d6 and 4d6 rolls" or any such nonsense - the rules will never over explain to such a detail. It only requires specifying something other than the original role. I.E. 1D6 is specifically not 2D6. Do you understand that "more specific" and "less specific" are both "specific"?

Surely your entire argument doesn't hinge entirely on that single sentence on page 2 that requires you to arbitrarily decide that the chronometron rule is "not specific enough". Could you please offer an example of where this is used besides Wolf Standard (because it is not a valid example for reasons already stated in this thread)?

2D6 by definition is two 1D6 rolls, of which the chronometron specifically allows you to re-roll one 1D6.

There is no supporting evidence for you claim and others here insisting that "specific" has a special meaning that they have decided it means.

WE have all the evidence we need, over 5 pages.

Its just you arguing against, by not understanding what specify means in this context

In this context you have to specify you can reroll part of a 2D6 roll, otherwise the rule has no meaning - anyone who can reroll a dice can reroll part of a leadership test. So in your definition they wrote a useless rule

Or, for a change, admit you're wrong and move on.

I wonder if GW gets some of these questions proposed for an FAQ and they just facepalm

I mean it seems very self explanatory, reroll ONE 1D6 per phase

Nemesor Dave wrote:2D6 by definition is two 1D6 rolls, of which the chronometron specifically allows you to re-roll one 1D6.

These are both false statements. The first is disproved by page 2 and the Space Wolf FAQ. The second is disproved by reading the Chronometron entry.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

The p2 BRB rule does not require "part of any 2d6 and 3d6 and 4d6 rolls" or any such nonsense - the rules will never over explain to such a detail. It only requires specifying something other than the original roll. I.E. 1D6 is specifically not 2D6. Do you understand that "more specific" and "less specific" are both "specific"?

Yeah. It's specifically NOT 2d6 because the rule SAYS D6 ROLL.

Nemesor Dave wrote:
Surely your entire argument doesn't hinge entirely on that single sentence on page 2 that requires you to arbitrarily decide that the chronometron rule is "not specific enough". Could you please offer an example of where this is used besides Wolf Standard (because it is not a valid example for reasons already stated in this thread)?

Everyone, literally everyone but you acknowledges the fact that the rule set on pg 2 of the BRB is quite specific in how it is supposed to be worked around.

Nemesor Dave wrote:
2D6 by definition is two 1D6 rolls, of which the chronometron specifically allows you to re-roll one 1D6.

Yeah, two 1d6 rolls, taken together AS ONE ROLL.

Nemesor Dave wrote:
There is no supporting evidence for you claim and others here insisting that "specific" has a special meaning that they have decided it means.

spe·cif·ic   [spi-sif-ik]
adjective
1.
having a special application, bearing, or reference; specifying, explicit, or definite: to state one's specific purpose.
2.
specified, precise, or particular: a specific sum of money.
3.
peculiar or proper to somebody or something, as qualities, characteristics, effects, etc.: His specific problems got him into trouble.
4.
of a special or particular kind.
5.
concerned specifically with the item or subject named (used in combination): The Secretary addressed himself to crop-specific problems.

That is the definition of specific everyone here knows and uses. In order for the re-roll of part of a 2d6 or 3d6 to be re-rolled, a rule must specifically (explicitly) state that this is possible. The wording on the Chronometron has no such wording. The rule says A (meaning 1) 1D6 ROLL. You can re-roll anything you only rolled 1d6 for in the first place.

McNinja wrote: Everyone, literally everyone but you acknowledges the fact that the rule set on pg 2 of the BRB is quite specific in how it is supposed to be worked around.

Unfortunately "everyone" has been wrong before. There are plenty of instances where "the community" has misunderstood a rule so I'm not really bothered by 3 or 4 people in this forum that bother to post in this thread all disagree with me.

I post mostly in Necron threads because I am familiar with the codex and rules, not because I need permission to play any particular way.

YMDC is supposed to be about RAW. Unless someone can post a new take on this or an additional rule regarding rerolls and the number of dice, I don't care to argue my point any further.

Your "point" has been proven wrong, by RAW. There's nothing to argue.

Nemesor Dave wrote:
There is no supporting evidence for you claim and others here insisting that "specific" has a special meaning that they have decided it means.

Actually, there is. You just don't want to accept it, and therefore ignore it. It has been linked to you multiple times in the Sweeping Advance thread for example.

So again, here's example what "specific" means:
Brb pg 40,
Sweeping advance
"Unless otherwise specified, no save or other special rule can rescue the unit at this stage"

Now, lets take example of rule saving one from Sweeping advance,
ATSKNF, page 21 GK codex
"]If Grey Knights are caught by a sweeping advance, they are not destroyed and will instead continue to fight normally..."

Like you can see, here they have specifically stated that GK are not destroyed in sweeping advance even when caught.


Lets look how the rules for re-rolling 2D6 are
Brb pg2
"If you re-roll a 2D6 or 3D6 roll, you must re-roll all of the dice and not just some of them, unless the rule granting you the re-roll explicitly specifies otherwise"

So unless special rule/wargear has wording that says something like "when re-rerolling 2d6 roll, you're allowed to choose which dice to reroll", you're not allowed to do that. ATSKNF is proof of that.


Note that SA only used as example what "unless specifically stated" means, please don't bring EL vs SA to this thread.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

McNinja wrote: Everyone, literally everyone but you acknowledges the fact that the rule set on pg 2 of the BRB is quite specific in how it is supposed to be worked around.

Unfortunately "everyone" has been wrong before. There are plenty of instances where "the community" has misunderstood a rule so I'm not really bothered by 3 or 4 people in this forum that bother to post in this thread all disagree with me.

I post mostly in Necron threads because I am familiar with the codex and rules, not because I need permission to play any particular way.

YMDC is supposed to be about RAW. Unless someone can post a new take on this or an additional rule regarding rerolls and the number of dice, I don't care to argue my point any further.

It is about RAW. RAW of the Chronometron entry makes no indication of being able to roll part of anything, just single D6 rolls.

It's true you don't need out permission to play any specific way. What you do need, however, is your opponents permission to play the Chronometron as you want.

However, this is not an argument about who has permission for what. This is an argument over what RAW says, and so far, you've kept saying the same thing over and over while I and a few other people have pointed out how it is incorrect. If you really do not want to continue this discussion, don't. But keep in mind that the RAW are RAW, and I doubt many people agree with your assertion of the rules for the Chronometron. It will be entirely up to your opponents and whether or not they allow you to start re-rolling part of your Leadership/morale/pinning tests or Scatter rolls.

Exactly. You can use Chonometron on a d6 roll. Is a LD check or scatter roll "a d6 roll"? No, it clearly is not.

Mannahnin wrote:Exactly. You can use Chonometron on a d6 roll. Is a LD check or scatter roll "a d6 roll"? No, it clearly is not.

This. And because it is not a D6 roll, you need something that can specifically allow you to reroll part of the 2D6 roll by saying it can reroll part of a D6 roll. If it doesnt say it can, it cannot - because that is what specific means.

You do realize that Nemesor Dave is trolling you, don't you?

Likely, however the Mods dont think he is (presumably) and there is the danger someone reading may think he has a valid argument - its more preventing other people from making mistakes

Nemesor Dave wrote:

McNinja wrote: Everyone, literally everyone but you acknowledges the fact that the rule set on pg 2 of the BRB is quite specific in how it is supposed to be worked around.

Unfortunately "everyone" has been wrong before. There are plenty of instances where "the community" has misunderstood a rule so I'm not really bothered by 3 or 4 people in this forum that bother to post in this thread all disagree with me.

I strongly encourage independent, critical, skepticism. For the most part, I think Nem Dave has conducted himself well in this thread. He has been accused of stupidity, stubbornness and trolling. He has responded for the most part with rules based arguments and logic in the face of personal attacks. If the NO position is so obviously correct, people should have little trouble making it perfectly clear. If the NO position is not ironclad and people are resorting to personal attacks to browbeat and bully a descanting voice into agreement, I am saddened by that. Nem Dave maybe wrong (also debatable) but at least he is arguing correctly.

Happyjew wrote:Xd6 means "roll x number of dice and add them together." The result of any one of those dice affect the over all roll.
In some cases you might roll multiple d6's simultaneously (such as when shooting). In that case you roll X d6. Each d6 affects only itself. Not the overall total. When you have permission to re-roll a d6 (aka 1d6), it must be used on a 1d6 roll.

IIRC, the space wolves faq refers to re-rolling a "result" of a 1. As in end result or final outcome of the aggregate dice. The chronometron may not have the same implication.

Happyjew wrote:Also regarding psychic tests (I know someone mentioned them somewhere), they specify double 1's and 6's because certain wargear/abilities can affect how many dice you roll.

I brought it up much earlier in the conversation, but I don't see your response answering the question. Case in point, let's say I'm playing Eldar and roll 3d6 on a psychic test. If I roll 3 1s, did I roll double ones? (if 2d6 is so clearly different than 3d6, then 3 ones ought to be triple ones and not count as double ones) If yes, then I am looking at the individual rolls as d6s before aggregating them. If no, then the language in perils of the warp is not applicable to this debate. Either way there is an unanswered question.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Except a d6 roll and a 1d6 roll are synonymous in the rules. Deja Vu.

I know this was stated, but I don't think it was demonstrated.

I agree, I would like to see this clarified. There was a widespread public opinion earlier in the SA vs EL debate that Destroyed and Wiped out were clearly different RAW and not synonymous in the rules. That opinion changed, IMO mostly due to people not accepting being bullied in a rules discussion.

If the NO position truly thinks the case is clear cut and that Nem Dave is only arguing out of stubbornness, I invite you to consider that you are being equally stubborn. High minded ideals like "for the public good" may be spoken with a straight face by both sides, but in the end, it seems to be the last word that is being fought over, not the truth.

foolishmortal wrote:Case in point, let's say I'm playing Eldar and roll 3d6 on a psychic test. If I roll 3 1s, did I roll double ones? (if 2d6 is so clearly different than 3d6, then 3 ones ought to be triple ones and not count as double ones) If yes, then I am looking at the individual rolls as d6s before aggregating them. If no, then the language in perils of the warp is not applicable to this debate. Either way there is an unanswered question.

And then per the rules (I'm assuming you rolled the 3 dice per your wargear), you then drop the highest (in this case "1") and are left with, oh my, double 1's.

foolishmortal wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

McNinja wrote: Everyone, literally everyone but you acknowledges the fact that the rule set on pg 2 of the BRB is quite specific in how it is supposed to be worked around.

Unfortunately "everyone" has been wrong before. There are plenty of instances where "the community" has misunderstood a rule so I'm not really bothered by 3 or 4 people in this forum that bother to post in this thread all disagree with me.

I strongly encourage independent, critical, skepticism. For the most part, I think Nem Dave has conducted himself well in this thread. He has been accused of stupidity, stubbornness and trolling. He has responded for the most part with rules based arguments and logic in the face of personal attacks. If the NO position is so obviously correct, people should have little trouble making it perfectly clear. If the NO position is not ironclad and people are resorting to personal attacks to browbeat and bully a descanting voice into agreement, I am saddened by that. Nem Dave maybe wrong (also debatable) but at least he is arguing correctly.

He has, but that still doesn't change the fact that he isn't right, has been shown he isn't right, and still thinks he is. I don't know if he's gonna keep posting in this thread, but anything he does does't change the wording for the Chronometron.

In the end, it is really up to him and his opponent to settle this argument if it ever comes up in a game.

foolishmortal wrote:He has responded for the most part with rules based arguments and logic in the face of personal attacks. If the NO position is so obviously correct, people should have little trouble making it perfectly clear. If the NO position is not ironclad and people are resorting to personal attacks to browbeat and bully a descanting voice into agreement, I am saddened by that. Nem Dave maybe wrong (also debatable) but at least he is arguing correctly.

You obviously haven't read the entire thread. I was arguing very politely, even though I was essentially repeating myself. And all I got in return was a refusal to accept the facts.

Happyjew wrote:Also regarding psychic tests (I know someone mentioned them somewhere), they specify double 1's and 6's because certain wargear/abilities can affect how many dice you roll.

I brought it up much earlier in the conversation, but I don't see your response answering the question. Case in point, let's say I'm playing Eldar and roll 3d6 on a psychic test. If I roll 3 1s, did I roll double ones? (if 2d6 is so clearly different than 3d6, then 3 ones ought to be triple ones and not count as double ones) If yes, then I am looking at the individual rolls as d6s before aggregating them. If no, then the language in perils of the warp is not applicable to this debate. Either way there is an unanswered question.

The Eldar abilities state to look at the 2 highest (or lowest) dice when considering success and Perils.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Except a d6 roll and a 1d6 roll are synonymous in the rules. Deja Vu.

I know this was stated, but I don't think it was demonstrated.

I agree, I would like to see this clarified. There was a widespread public opinion earlier in the SA vs EL debate that Destroyed and Wiped out were clearly different RAW and not synonymous in the rules. That opinion changed, IMO mostly due to people not accepting being bullied in a rules discussion.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:If I didn't have a 2 year old passed out in my lap with my brb in the other room I'd demonstrate.

p.8 roll a D6 for a characteristic test. Probably countless other places. I'd agree 1D6 = D6.

Perhaps you should read the entire thread before asking for clarification. It's at the top of the 5th page.

If the NO position truly thinks the case is clear cut and that Nem Dave is only arguing out of stubbornness, I invite you to consider that you are being equally stubborn. High minded ideals like "for the public good" may be spoken with a straight face by both sides, but in the end, it seems to be the last word that is being fought over, not the truth.

Except we've presented the truth. And are getting nothing but fingers in ears "nonononononono". Or that's what it seems like.

Happyjew wrote:And then per the rules (I'm assuming you rolled the 3 dice per your wargear), you then drop the highest (in this case "1") and are left with, oh my, double 1's.

If this is the case than why does the Perils of the Warp rule refer to double 1s and/or 6s? If all that is looked at is the final result of 2 or 12, then why does the rule refer to double 1s or 6s?

I ask because great weight has been given by the NO position to the distinction between d6 + d6 and 2d6. The perils of the warp rule seems show that a 2d6 result is made up of d6 + d6. If that is the case then I would like clarification on why the chronometron cannot be used to re-roll one of them. I see why it cannot be used to re-roll both of them. The chronometron rule does not grant specific permission to do so (IMO). What I don't see is a RAW restriction on re-rolling a d6 roll.

Because on page 2 if you're going to re-roll any of the dice in a 2d6 roll you must re-roll both.

Read. The. Thread.

Page 2, and the Space Wolf FAQ, say that a 2d6 roll is a different thing from a d6 roll, and you cannot consider the two component dice in a 2d6 roll separately.