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.

Gwar! wrote:

Panic wrote:yeah?
Is that what PotW asks for?
a 'double 1 and a X?'

or does PotW it ask for 'a double 1'

Panic...

And what did you give it?

A double one! Just because there is an x as well means nothing.

Actually on the roll of 3D6 you gave it a double one and an x. It requires that you have the result is a double 1 - not that the result contains a double one but the result is a double one. Therefore since the requirements are not satisfied that you ended up with the result of double 1 then you never invoke the rules of perils of the warp. A 3D6 roll is 3 six-sided dice that create a result of {x,x,x}. Mathematically on a 3D6 this is the smallest set that you can have.

You are required to use 3D6 (because it states that is is a 3D6 roll).
The result is dice 1 = x, dice 2 = x, dice 3 = x. The result is (x,x,x). There are no sub- sets of this except moving the numbers into different positions because the result MUST HAVE 3 dice. This is defined by the 3D6 in the rules. Now in the rulebook to determine if perils of the warp exist you must look at the result and look for double 1s or double 6s. There are no result sets with two dice - the minimum result set has 3 dice. Therefore the rulebook and the codex rules are in conflict with each other and we must use the codex rules since they are more specific. Perils of the warp only occurs on a 12+ result.

Gwar! wrote:A double one! Just because there is an x as well means nothing.

yeah...


GwarHammer:

Perils of the Warp wrote:I Noticed your opponent passing a pschic test there... Did he roll a double 1?

Gwar wrote:yeah he did! He got a double 1... .......and a 3

Perils of the Warp wrote: what was that... and a..?

Gwar wrote:oh nothing... he got a double 1!.. zapp him!!!

That bit there, when you went all quiet... that was you cheating that was...

Panic...

tsk tsk

kirsanth wrote:I do entirely understand your points.
I simply do not agree. FYI.


It does not say "contain" and more than runes say "only".

So I can see confusion in either case.
A moot point, as it were.

As for combat drugs, I do not neccessarily agree that there is a correlation, I was pointing out what they said so that others would understand.

Both sides arguments can be won by adding in words to either codex. If the books were written without flaws there would be no need for a board to argue these points on. And really what fun would that be?

I personally do not agree with your point but I see the argument being made. I just do not agree that you are allowed to take the subset of 2 dice when the roll calls for 3 dice to be rolled as a single test.

I can see a similar argument happening if a gun had both the melta and the rending rules. AFAIK there is no such gun because of the rules headaches it would cause. plus I don't think it makes any sense whatsoever.

rogueeyes wrote:I can see a similar argument happening if a gun had both the melta and the rending rules. AFAIK there is no such gun because of the rules headaches it would cause. plus I don't think it makes any sense whatsoever.

Hive Tyrant with Rending Claws is the closest I can think of.

And they covered that in the Nid FAQ with a surprising answer (aka the rules).

FAQ is not the rule, but GW's house rule. It is an interesting outcome for the double 1 crowd. But we can also look at the FAQ's and Eldar Autarch's reserve roll stacking and IG's Astropath's and/or Officer of the Fleet does not for some reason. Go GW for consistency.

Determining how to roll for a psychic test uses a normal leadership test which is specifically defined as rolling 2D6 dice.

"All enemy Psychic tests must be taken on 3D6, suffering a Perils of the Warp attack on any roll of 12 or above."

This 3D6 is not a leadership test but a psychic test. It replaces the leadership test with a new mechanic, 3D6.

Leadership tests must be taken in order to use the rules that define how Perils of the warp are "determined to have occurred".

Therefore the only way to suffer a Perils of the Warp attack when taking a Psychic test using 3D6 is defined by, "on any roll of 12 or above.


Edit: Just realized you can not fail a psychic test with this definition. So it must be a leadership test. Oh well...

Here is my idea on this. It would fail on any two 1s being rolled, any two 6s being rolled, and any combination of 12 and higher. Here is why:

RAW in Eldar Codex: Does not override the RAW in the main rulebook, as it clearly doesn't say 'instead of', 'in the place of'...etc. So the 12+ is in addition to the main rulebook

RAW in the Main Rulebook: Does still happen because even on multiple dice the 'result' idea to say doubles can't happen...doesn't hold water. Can a 'result of a 1 being rolled' still happen on multiple dice? Yes. Can a double still happen as a result on multiple dice? Yes. My thinking is that a single roll can have multiple results....as each dice and die combination are results. Results doesn't have to mean the sum of all dice, unless it'd say so specifically.

Anybody see a whole in my logic? This is just my 2 cents afterall.

Right lets use this situation:

For some reason you decide to roll youe 3D6 one by one. You roll a 1 then a 1. You may as well stop here becasue you have already rolled a double one so there is no point in rolling die no. 3 as the result of it will not affect anything.

You do the same but you roll a 1 then a 4 then a 1. Some in this thread argue this is not a double 1.But it is. If you had happened to roll them 1, 1, 4. You would have stopped after the second 1 becasue it was double 1. 1, 1, 4 is the same as 1, 4, 1.

Farseer Faenyin wrote:Here is my idea on this. It would fail on any two 1s being rolled, any two 6s being rolled, and any combination of 12 and higher. Here is why:

RAW in Eldar Codex: Does not override the RAW in the main rulebook, as it clearly doesn't say 'instead of', 'in the place of'...etc. So the 12+ is in addition to the main rulebook

RAW in the Main Rulebook: Does still happen because even on multiple dice the 'result' idea to say doubles can't happen...doesn't hold water. Can a 'result of a 1 being rolled' still happen on multiple dice? Yes. Can a double still happen as a result on multiple dice? Yes. My thinking is that a single roll can have multiple results....as each dice and die combination are results. Results doesn't have to mean the sum of all dice, unless it'd say so specifically.

Anybody see a whole in my logic? This is just my 2 cents afterall.

Yes. The Eldar codex says you roll 3D6 instead for Psychic Tests. This is in direct conflict with Psychic Tests from the rulebook where you use 2D6. Thus the Psychic Test rule is clarified in the codex where this causes problems (perils of the warp). Luckily GW figured this out a head of time and gave us the solution to administer the perils of the warp rule on a 12+.

3D6 is the set of 3 dice. This is where the argument lies. Saying 2 out of the 3 causes a rule to take place is invalid because the minimum set you can have as stated by the codex is 3D6. Now if the codex states that you roll 2D6 + D6 you can have doubles because the smallest set you can have is the 2D6 or the 1D6. This is split into 2 distinct sets of 2 dice and 1 die. 3D6 is a set of 3 dice - not every single subset (single die, double die, triple die) of those 3 dice.

In the rulebook you suffer perils of the warp on the result of double ones or double 6s. This is a set of two dice and equates to the set fo 2 dice being rolled for the psychic test. When 2 sets are compared you can equal them out to one another. 2 ones = 2 ones.

Now when you roll a set of 3 dice for the 3D6 you can get 3 ones. The set of 3 ones does not equate to 2 ones. You can say that the set of 2 ones is contained within the set of 2 ones but your result set is still 3 ones. 3 ones <> 2 ones. 3 ones != 2 ones.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eldar Own wrote:Right lets use this situation:

For some reason you decide to roll youe 3D6 one by one. You roll a 1 then a 1. You may as well stop here becasue you have already rolled a double one so there is no point in rolling die no. 3 as the result of it will not affect anything.

You do the same but you roll a 1 then a 4 then a 1. Some in this thread argue this is not a double 1.But it is. If you had happened to roll them 1, 1, 4. You would have stopped after the second 1 becasue it was double 1. 1, 1, 4 is the same as 1, 4, 1.

Actually there is still a point in rolling because you are required by the codex to roll 3 dice. Also, you just cheated and passed your leadership test on 2 ones with a leadership of 7 when you could have failed with a roll of 8.

Even if you roll one by one the entire set of 3 rolls are taken as a whole. 3D6 does not mean you roll 2 dice and stop. You roll 3 dice. Whether you roll them one by one or all at once it means you MUST roll 3 dice.

Yes yes, but there is indeed a pair of 1s rolled - you keep using "set" which the rules do not. You also rolled a 1, three ones, and a total of 3.

Can someone add something useful now, please?

kirsanth wrote:Yes yes, but there is indeed a pair of 1s rolled - you keep using "set" which the rules do not.

Can someone add something useful now, please?

What does 3D6 mean? The sum of 3 Dice. This is a set. A set of 3 Dice. This is a basic mathematical principle.

Then perils can never apply without the Eldar codex.
This is patently not true.

kirsanth wrote:Then perils can never apply without the Eldar codex.
This is patently not true.

Page 2 of the Rulebook:

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

By RAW you roll 3 dice. The scores are added together. The result is 1 dice with a 1, a second dice with a 1 and a third dice with a random number that may or may not make you fail the test. The result is 2 ones and a number from 1-6. The set is {1,1,x}. When you are told that you must roll 3D6 you roll 3 dice. This is your set that is created and added together to create your result of dice 1 + dice 2 + dice 3 = sum.

According to the codex if your sum > 12 you suffer perils.

On 2D6 you have have the result set of {1,1}. This is a double. It is a pair. It is a set of 2 numbers and a double is a set of 2. On 3D6 you can only have the result set of {1,1,x}. The set of {1,1,x} cannot be a double because a double is a pair or set of 2. Three numbers is not 2 numbers. You can have a triple because a triple is a set of 3 numbers.

rogueeyes wrote:

Eldar Own wrote:Right lets use this situation:

For some reason you decide to roll youe 3D6 one by one. You roll a 1 then a 1. You may as well stop here becasue you have already rolled a double one so there is no point in rolling die no. 3 as the result of it will not affect anything.

You do the same but you roll a 1 then a 4 then a 1. Some in this thread argue this is not a double 1.But it is. If you had happened to roll them 1, 1, 4. You would have stopped after the second 1 becasue it was double 1. 1, 1, 4 is the same as 1, 4, 1.

Actually there is still a point in rolling because you are required by the codex to roll 3 dice. Also, you just cheated and passed your leadership test on 2 ones with a leadership of 7 when you could have failed with a roll of 8.

Even if you roll one by one the entire set of 3 rolls are taken as a whole. 3D6 does not mean you roll 2 dice and stop. You roll 3 dice. Whether you roll them one by one or all at once it means you MUST roll 3 dice.

Yes it says roll 3 dice and you could fail your LD test but i was refering to PotW. Whatever your third result is you still take a PotW. Others were saying that 1, 1, 4 does not contain a double one so if you rolled a double 1 first you know you have a double 1 and the next result would not a ffect PotW.

rogueeyes wrote:What does 3D6 mean? The sum of 3 Dice. This is a set. A set of 3 Dice. This is a basic mathematical principle.

A sum of three dice and a set of three dice are each used for different purposes.
Much like the sum of the roll is used to check against LD (and against 12 with the Eldar power) and the dice themselves are used to look for a pair.

Seriously there is something in the rules that doesn't work. Oh Noes!! How many times has GW done this. Tons. That's why there is the INATFAQ and house rules on how it should be generally played. IMO by RAW double 1 can never be "the result" as a Leadership Test already defined "the result" as the sum of the dice. Is that how the general community plays, or me for that fact. No it isn't. We interpret that a sum of 2 is the same as double 1. The contention is that does the result {1, 1, 3} or {5} equate to a double 1. Obviously not. Does it contain a double 1 within the result. Sure it does. Does it apply. That is where the confusion sets in. Some say yes, some say no. Some people are mean about it, others are not. I think there is enough general debate over semantics that it should probably be included in the next INATFAQ, since we will probably never see a ruling from GW on the matter.

The group I play with uses the INATFAQ for rules debates, if it isn't in there we 4+ it. If a ruling is made I'm happy either way. If it goes against me. My army just got a bit better. If it doesn't my ego gets a boost. So a Win Win for me.

yeah,
I think that's this over...
There will be no agreement between the 'sides' here..

I think it's obvious...
{1}{1}{X} ≠ {1}{1}

Panic...

Double 1 is generally used for bad things like PotW so if the result has a double 1 (which is unlucky and bad) it is PotW. The reason why Runes of Warding is good becasue it increases the chance of PotW not becasue its easier to get 12+ but becasu eits easier to get two 1s.

Locking to avoid the inevitable flamewar. It looks like empasse at this point.


Automatically Appended Next Post: