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.

G'Day everyone.

I was wondering about BS and the "roll to hit".
The reason is because my friend and i recintly played a game inwhich my orks played his Guard.
This disagreement came up when he gave his squad "Fist Rank, FIRE, Second Rank, FIRE" and he had 30 shots but only rolled 10 BS.
His argument is that each model only needs to roll BS once as it shows his readiness to fire not his accuracy.
My rebuttle was that each shot needed to be rolled as it shows accuracy not preparedness.
While this rule doesnt matter with one shot modelss, he haw a Leman Russ Punisher, 20 Str 5 shots, and in his point of view would only have to roll 1 D6 to get all the hits.
It doesnt make sense if one roll makes all of his hits "hit" which is CRAZY
I mean, 20 shots all hit cause on roll is ludicros.

Please tell me the correct answer, im pretty sure im right, but hey, i have been wrong in the past.

Old Sledgeaxe

Chuck Norris and Mr T walked into a bar, the building exploded because no one building could contain that much awesomness.

Show him page 15 of the rulebook. Specifically the boxed section entitled "The Shooting Dequence" ... step 3.

No.

He rolls ALL 30.

Tell him that he can't cheat forever

To be fair, he's not necessarily cheating. People (particularly kids without rulebooks of their own) quite often wind up with some rather 'interesting' rules that they're convinced are correct, gathered from an incomplete reading of the rules or through simply misunderstanding a given section.

To be fair, he's not necessarily cheating. People (particularly kids without rulebooks of their own) quite often wind up with some rather 'interesting' rules that they're convinced are correct, gathered from an incomplete reading of the rules or through simply misunderstanding a given section.

Agreed. People seem to throw around the word 'cheating' very liberally these days. I think someone has to be fully aware of the rules yet consciously choose to break them to be considered a cheater.

If I was to make a genuine mistake about rules during a game and someone brought it to my attention after the fact I would be grateful. What I would NOT be grateful of, however, would be that person saying "Hey, I found out you were cheating last game..."

Maybe too sensitive, but food for thought perhaps. At the very least, it's nice to give your friends the benefit of the doubt before you vilify them!

DoW

I agree with you DoW.... I know I have stated once that someone was cheating, but I meant that one of my opponents had played something wrong... I meant no disrespect to the player and learned to state that someone played a rule wrong. Just recently we had a discussion on Marker Lights (not going to change the topic here to what we decided) and not once did cheating come up. Getting the hang of 40k and not trying to be a rule raper (we decided that 2" and 2 1/16 was the same thing and that we would trust one another) and more friendly competition... I still cant beat Orks with my sisters yet though.... lol

s2