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.

Reserves specify unmodified roll. Wolf Standard does not.

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

The same applies to D6+1.

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

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






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


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


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

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


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

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

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



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





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

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

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

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

 azazel the cat wrote:

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

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

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

 DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 DeathReaper wrote:

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

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

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

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


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

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

 kronk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

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

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

The bolded is absolutely false.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Well, since they do...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

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

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

Is that what you're saying?

rigeld2 wrote:

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

Well, since they do...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

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

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

Is that what you're saying?

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

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

Modifying the roll is still irrelevant.

Fast rolling confuses people.

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

 liturgies of blood wrote:

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

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

Is that what you're saying?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please correct either of those statements.

A natural roll is a roll in a situation where both the result and the roll are taken into account in the procedure for a rule.
For example in a system that uses natural rolls to give modifiers: In traveler, I roll a 12 on 2D6 roll to hit, my dex and gun combat gives a +3 to the roll, some negative modifiers apply but I still manage to pass the test. Since I rolled a natural 12 I get a +2 mod to the damage roll.
So in this case the roll has an effect as does the result.
In 40k In the general case the roll has no effect but the result does, unless it's a straight d6 roll where the roll is the result. The more specific nature of the reserves roll requires both the roll to be within a certain range and the result to be within a certain range

In the case of the wolf banner the roll is what is important, in the case of reserves both the roll and the result are important.

In traveler, I roll a 12 on 2D6 roll to hit, my dex and gun combat gives a +3 to the roll, some negative modifiers apply but I still manage to pass the test. Since I rolled a 12 I get a +2 mod to the damage roll.
Using your definitions, what's the difference between my statement (in italics) and yours?

Ok, the natural roll becomes important only in rolls where you have passed the required feat.
So there is a roll, a result and dependent on that result the roll, the natural roll, can have additional effects.

The dice roll section tells us that a roll leads to a result which has the end effects.
The rest of the book plays fast and loose with roll and result, that is all fine and good but the rules on how to roll dice draw a distinction.
It could be said that "a roll of a 3+" is just an abbreviation for a roll with a result of a 3+.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Ok, the natural roll becomes important only in rolls where you have passed the required feat.

Citation required please.

So there is a roll, a result and dependent on that result the roll, the natural roll, can have additional effects.

So the roll and natural roll are different?

The dice roll section tells us that a roll leads to a result which has the end effects.

Sure. Let's say I agree to that for now.

Same for a modified roll but if the roll is the natural roll then you would have to apply the modifiers to it. That is the distinction that is being made.

Wait, what? Is the natural modified or unmodified? Is the roll modified or unmodified?

It ensures you don't get a slowed RAW arguement that "I can never fail my reserve roll, the natural roll isn't a 1 because the natural roll is the roll and the modifier is applied to the roll".

I don't follow that example whatsoever.

Using your assertions I can't figure out a difference between natural roll and roll. Yes - I get that natural roll is unmodified - you've asserted that roll is unmodified as well.
My point is that, using your assertions, a roll of 1 is the exact same as a "natural" roll of 1. Because you're saying both that they're different and that they are the same.

rigeld2 wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Ok, the natural roll becomes important only in rolls where you have passed the required feat.

Citation required please.

Well your side brought up natural rolls which are not defined in the rule book. They are a less frequent event in a game and so I would put them in the more specific category of the rules myself.

So there is a roll, a result and dependent on that result the roll, the natural roll, can have additional effects.

So the roll and natural roll are different?

Yep one you apply modifiers to the other you don't. Because if A=B, and A must be added to C. Than B must be added to C. That is why they are different.

The dice roll section tells us that a roll leads to a result which has the end effects.

Sure. Let's say I agree to that for now.

I am glad you agree with the rules. Page 5, modifying dice rolls, line 3.

Using your assertions I can't figure out a difference between natural roll and roll. Yes - I get that natural roll is unmodified - you've asserted that roll is unmodified as well.
My point is that, using your assertions, a roll of 1 is the exact same as a "natural" roll of 1. Because you're saying both that they're different and that they are the same.

They are the same value but not the same thing for purposes of the mechanics of rolling, that was what I am trying to say.

They are the same value but different terms within the rules. One is defined in the brb, the other is defined by gamers.
Sorry if I didn't make that clear I am getting my ass handed to me by the flu today.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Ok, the natural roll becomes important only in rolls where you have passed the required feat.

Citation required please.

Well your side brought up natural rolls which are not defined in the rule book. They are a less frequent event in a game and so I would put them in the more specific category of the rules myself.

But there's no numerical difference between a natural roll and a roll, according to you?
So, again, according to you, the word "natural" in the reserve rules is redundant? Also, any mention of "unmodified" roll is redundant - because the roll is explicitly separate from the result and you can never conflate the two.

So there is a roll, a result and dependent on that result the roll, the natural roll, can have additional effects.

So the roll and natural roll are different?

Yep one you apply modifiers to the other you don't. Because if A=B, and A must be added to C. Than B must be added to C. That is why they are different.

...
roll = A
modifier = B
result = C
natural roll = D

(A = D) + B = C
Agree or disagree?

Using your assertions I can't figure out a difference between natural roll and roll. Yes - I get that natural roll is unmodified - you've asserted that roll is unmodified as well.
My point is that, using your assertions, a roll of 1 is the exact same as a "natural" roll of 1. Because you're saying both that they're different and that they are the same.

They are the same value but not the same thing for purposes of the mechanics of rolling, that was what I am trying to say.

They are the same value but different terms within the rules. One is defined in the brb, the other is defined by gamers.
Sorry if I didn't make that clear I am getting my ass handed to me by the flu today.

How can they possibly be different for anything?
If to use the "no modifier added" value requires the use of the word "natural" or "unmodified" for rolling mechanics then why are you adamant that the Wolf Standard (that uses neither of those words) allows it?
If "natural" or "unmodified" is not required to use the value before adding modifiers for rolling mechanics, then you're agreeing that those words are redundant when used.

The natural roll is the actual value on the dice, if you roll two dice for a 2d6, you get a natural 2-12, whereas for a D6+1 you only get a natural 1-6.
It doesn't gel perfectly with the modified dice, that is the distinction, for Xd6 it happens after modifiers according to GW while for D6+x rolls it happens before the modifier.

That is how natural dice are done in games I play where there is a mechanic. Maybe there are other ways but I don't know them.

Te actual rules disagree with you - there's no difference between 2d6 and a d6+1 aside from the range of results.

What is a natural roll on 2D6?
It is what you get when you add two dice together. ie When you get the modified result.

What is the natural roll on D6+1?
It's what you roll on the dice before the modifier. ie What you have before you get the modified result.

According to GW 2D6 is a modified roll, so in your world natural rolls must equal the results of modified rolls, but this isn't the case as reserves roll tells us so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
Te actual rules disagree with you - there's no difference between 2d6 and a d6+1 aside from the range of results.

This is why a natural roll =/= every roll, hence as per page 5 result =/= roll, hence re-roll any dice roll of a 1 applies to modified dice rolls of 1D6+x but not to YD6 as you must have specific permission to re-roll YD6 as per page 5.

As I said earlier the only reason imho a natural roll is in there is to differentiate the roll and the result in that paragraph, I don't know if natural roll was ever mentioned in 5th edition but there were dice rolls in specific situations where the result and the roll may have to be taken into account. The natural roll is a case of sloppy writing.