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.

Martel732 wrote:
The ability doesn't exist if you don't roll a one.

Twin-linked doesn't allow the ability to reroll unless you roll a one, also. And in some cases, a 2, a 3, a 4, and/or a 5.

Simply put, Twin-linked still requires a failure in order to reroll. It gives itself permission to reroll Blasts as well, but that still doesn't change the fact that the base ability still requires a failure in order to function. Twin-linked does not allow you to reroll successes.

 Charistoph wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The ability doesn't exist if you don't roll a one.

Twin-linked doesn't allow the ability to reroll unless you roll a one, also. And in some cases, a 2, a 3, a 4, and/or a 5.

Simply put, Twin-linked still requires a failure in order to reroll. It gives itself permission to reroll Blasts as well, but that still doesn't change the fact that the base ability still requires a failure in order to function. Twin-linked does not allow you to reroll successes.

I fully grant this point, but so what? Twin-link says that you can reroll any and all misses to hit. Preferred enemy specifically requires that you roll a 1 to hit.

And again, let's abstract from this lawyering over the "letter of the law," so to speak, and attend to the "spirit of the law." Is it in keeping with the obvious intention of GW in writing the preferred enemy rule that blasts should reroll ALL misses when they obviously did not intend any other kind of weapon to do so using that rule?

The answer to this should be obvious.

To use D&D terminology, the intent of GW obviously was to prevent "critical failures" or "critical misses" against the preferred enemy.

Thus, I repeat: if we interpret the letter of the rule in light of the spirit of the rule, the correct answer is obvious: you can reroll gets hot, but not the scatter dice.

Traditio wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The ability doesn't exist if you don't roll a one.

Twin-linked doesn't allow the ability to reroll unless you roll a one, also. And in some cases, a 2, a 3, a 4, and/or a 5.

Simply put, Twin-linked still requires a failure in order to reroll. It gives itself permission to reroll Blasts as well, but that still doesn't change the fact that the base ability still requires a failure in order to function. Twin-linked does not allow you to reroll successes.

I fully grant this point, but so what? Twin-link says that you can reroll any and all misses to hit. Preferred enemy specifically requires that you roll a 1 to hit.

And again, let's abstract from this lawyering over the "letter of the law," so to speak, and attend to the "spirit of the law." Is it in keeping with the obvious intention of GW in writing the preferred enemy rule that blasts should reroll ALL misses when they obviously did not intend any other kind of weapon to do so using that rule?

The answer to this should be obvious.

To use D&D terminology, the intent of GW obviously was to prevent "critical failures" or "critical misses" against the preferred enemy.

Thus, I repeat: if we interpret the letter of the rule in light of the spirit of the rule, the correct answer is obvious: you can reroll gets hot, but not the scatter dice.

For the simple case that relying on any condition to make Preferred Enemy moot also makes Twin-Linked moot as well, since both are reliant on conditions to be met before applying their ability to reroll.

Even when Twin-Linked is rerolling Blasts, it still requires a miss condition to be met to reroll.

If you require conditions to be met in order for the ability to reroll to be recognized, then both Preferred Enemy and Twin-Linked are in the same basket of considerations.

However, if you believe that even the capacity to reroll is recognized as the ability to reroll, then Preferred Enemy and Twin-Linked are both considered the same when dealing with situations where To-Hit dice are not actually rolled.

Charistoph wrote:For the simple case that relying on any condition to make Preferred Enemy moot also makes Twin-Linked moot as well, since both are reliant on conditions to be met before applying their ability to reroll.

Even when Twin-Linked is rerolling Blasts, it still requires a miss condition to be met to reroll.

Once again, apply common sense and attend to the spirit of the rules. Is it possible for a miss condition to obtain when firing a blast weapon? Yes. If you roll the scatter dice and no models are underneath the blast template after you resolve the scatter, you have missed. If you have a rule which says that you can reroll all misses, you may reroll the scatter dice.

Preferred enemy is not such a rule. It specifically says "1s." It would, perhaps, make sense to reroll 6s for the scatter dice, given the spirit of the preferred enemy rules, but alas, the rules do not tell us that we can do this. It only says "1s."

However, if you believe that even the capacity to reroll is recognized as the ability to reroll, then Preferred Enemy and Twin-Linked are both considered the same when dealing with situations where To-Hit dice are not actually rolled.

"To-hit dice" is not the same thing as "to hit." For all obvious intents and purposes, the rolling of gets hot, the rolling of the scatter die, the moving of the blast template, etc. constitutes the "to hit" roll.

Again, I urge you: simply apply common sense.

And again, preferred enemy does not confer a capacity to reroll. It confers a capacity or an ability to reroll 1s. For some reason, you guys keep conveniently missing that key word.

Traditio wrote:

Charistoph wrote:For the simple case that relying on any condition to make Preferred Enemy moot also makes Twin-Linked moot as well, since both are reliant on conditions to be met before applying their ability to reroll.

Even when Twin-Linked is rerolling Blasts, it still requires a miss condition to be met to reroll.

Once again, apply common sense and attend to the spirit of the rules.

Spirit of the rules is pointless when determining the Rules As Written, which is all I am addressing at this time. It can when be used when making a determination on HYWPI and recommendations for the end, but not when looking at the literal viewpoint of the written rule.

Traditio wrote:
Is it possible for a miss condition to obtain when firing a blast weapon? Yes. If you roll the scatter dice and no models are underneath the blast template after you resolve the scatter, you have missed. If you have a rule which says that you can reroll all misses, you may reroll the scatter dice.

Preferred enemy is not such a rule. It specifically says "1s." It would, perhaps, make sense to reroll 6s for the scatter dice, given the spirit of the preferred enemy rules, but alas, the rules do not tell us that we can do this. It only says "1s."

Actually noting what Preferred Enemy states as a gateway is not any more relevant than Twin-linked. Here is what the Blast rules state about Rerolls:

If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit and chooses to do so after firing a Blast weapon, the player must re-roll both the scatter dice and the 2D6.

Note that just the ability to reroll rolls To- Hit is all that is required. And it is to that I stated the stipulations as I did.

Here is Gets Hot regarding rerolls for weapons that do not roll to-hit:

If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit (including because of BS6+ or the Twin-linked special rule), a Wound is only suffered if the To Hit re-roll is also a 1; it may also re-roll Gets Hot results of 1 for weapons that do not roll To Hit.

The underlined establishes the relationship between Blasts rerolls and Gets Hot rerolls, as they follow the same standards.

Traditio wrote:

However, if you believe that even the capacity to reroll is recognized as the ability to reroll, then Preferred Enemy and Twin-Linked are both considered the same when dealing with situations where To-Hit dice are not actually rolled.

"To-hit dice" is not the same thing as "to hit." For all obvious intents and purposes, the rolling of gets hot, the rolling of the scatter die, the moving of the blast template, etc. constitutes the "to hit" roll.

I didn't say that "To-hit dice is the same as To-Hit". To-Hit Dice are used when To-Hit Rolls are made. Attacks using one of the templates do not roll To-Hit, therefore no To-Hit Dice are used.

Gets Hot does not use To-Hit rolls when determining its state with weapons that do not roll To-Hit. A separate die is rolled, making any direct correlation for To-Hit rolls pointless. Instead, both Gets Hot and Blasts allow for rerolls of their condition when To-Hit rolls are not possible, to reroll their specialty rolls made in their place. For Gets Hot, this is a determination on if the Attack Wounds the shooter or not. For Blasts this is the determination of Scatter.

Traditio wrote:
Again, I urge you: simply apply common sense.

A pointless endeavor to this response, as it was simply stating that the perspective on Preferred Enemy is the same as for Twin-Linked, as they are both contingent on failure to apply a reroll. Preferred Enemy's reroll is just more specific. That is all. I was not taking sides on the debate itself, just clarifying the relationships.

And that IS applying Common Sense.

Traditio wrote:
And again, preferred enemy does not confer a capacity to reroll. It confers a capacity or an ability to reroll 1s. For some reason, you guys keep conveniently missing that key word.

It does just as much as Twin-Linked does. Both are conditional on failure. If one can reroll Gets Hot and Blasts, why cannot the other? The fact that Preferred Enemy requires a more specific failure is irrelevant, they both require failure to apply a reroll. In conditions where To-Hit rolls are not used, the standards should be the same.

Charistoph:

Let us assume that I grant your arguments. It does not follow from this, that, RAW, preferred enemy permits re-rolls of the scatter dice. Either the rolling of the scatter dice counts as a to-hit roll, or else, it doesn't.

If it does count as a to-hit roll, then my arguments follow. Only twin-link and equivalents permit a re-rolling of the scatter dice.

If it does not count as a to-hit roll, then neither twin-link nor preferred enemy permit a re-rolling of the scatter dice.

In neither case does preferred enemy confer a re-roll. Again, the preferred enemy rule specifies "1s."

Again, I quote the rule that you cited above: "If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit and chooses to do so after firing a Blast weapon, the player must re-roll both the scatter dice and the 2D6."

A model with preferred enemy does not have the ability to re-roll its rolls to hit. It has the ability to re-roll 1s to hit.

In either case, the gets hot result of 1 may be re-rolled.

Traditio wrote:
Charistoph:

Let us assume that I grant your arguments. It does not follow from this, that, RAW, preferred enemy permits re-rolls of the scatter dice. Either the rolling of the scatter dice counts as a to-hit roll, or else, it doesn't.

Actually not what I stated. Please actually reread what I stated. I was making no assertions as to which side of "does it or does it not" I was supporting. I am only stipulating a relationship between two different rules which allow for a reroll under conditions of a miss.

Traditio wrote:
If it does count as a to-hit roll, then my arguments follow. Only twin-link and equivalents permit a re-rolling of the scatter dice.

If it does not count as a to-hit roll, then neither twin-link nor preferred enemy permit a re-rolling of the scatter dice.

In neither case does preferred enemy confer a re-roll. Again, the preferred enemy rule specifies "1s."

Again, I quote the rule that you cited above: "If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit and chooses to do so after firing a Blast weapon, the player must re-roll both the scatter dice and the 2D6."

A model with preferred enemy does not have the ability to re-roll its rolls to hit. It has the ability to re-roll 1s to hit.

Level of condition for the reroll is never stated in these cases. Twin-linked has as much of a condition for a reroll as Preferred Enemy. The only difference is that twin-linked's condition is just met more often and more easily than Preferred Enemy's. That is all.

If one requires conditions to be met before any ability is recognized, then neither Preferred Enemy nor Twin-linked will work with template/Blast weapons Gets Hot rolls.

If one only recognizes that the ability exists regardless of conditions, then both Preferred Enemy and Twin-linked will work with template/blast weapons Gets Hot rolls.

In this, Twin-linked and Preferred Enemy are the same.

Traditio, so it is your standpoint, that the only things that allow you to re-roll scatter is Twin-linked, and Ammo Runts?

Traditio - have you read Blasts? They NEVER rol to hit. It states so explicitly in the rules that instead of rolling to hit...

So you cannot make any requirement on a "to hit" roll in ordder to determine if it grants an ability to reroll

And, as requested, you didnt look at gets hot and rerolls either. Where it states, unequivocaby, that BS6+ grant the ABILITY to reroll to hit.

BS6 requires you to roll a 1 to hit, yet ALWAYS grants the ability to reroll to hit

PE requires you to roll a 1 to hit... yes must ALWAYS grant the ability.

Again. 20 odd pages proved this. YOur idea that scatter is like a to hit is false, and denied by the rules.

RAW: PE lets you reroll scatter AND gets hot. RAW.

I'd be tempted to walk from a table with someone trying to squeeze this much utility out of preferred enemy. Starcraft looks better and better.

Martel, would you also walk away from someone who tried to re-roll scatter after casting Guide or Prescience on the unit?

I wish to return to this posting of yours, since you actually bothered quoting various rules.

Charistoph wrote:Here is what the Blast rules state about Rerolls:

If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit and chooses to do so after firing a Blast weapon, the player must re-roll both the scatter dice and the 2D6.

I wish to note the following about what you've quoted:

1. The rule says: "If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit and chooses to do so after firing a blast weapon..." What is the referent of "so"? If a model chooses to do what after firing a blast weapon? To get the referent of "so," we need to back up to a previous part of the sentence: "If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit..." So, after a model fires its blast weapon, if it has the ability to do so, it may re-roll its its rolls To Hit.

I deduce from this that, according to GW, there is a definite sense in which a model firing a blast weapon rolls To Hit. This was more explicit in 5th edition. In 5th edition, you centered the blast over an enemy model and then actually rolled to hit. This changed in 6th edition, where the to-hit roll for a blast weapon became a roll of the scatter dice.

Point to take away from this: blast weapons roll to-hit according to the rules, and that roll To Hit is the rolling of the scatter dice.

2. The rule says: "If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit..." In order to reroll the scatter dice, you must have the ability to reroll. As I've pointed out repeatedly, preferred enemy does not grant this. It specifically permits re-rolls to a to-hit result of 1.

Note that just the ability to reroll rolls To- Hit is all that is required. And it is to that I stated the stipulations as I did.

I grant this. I simply deny that preferred enemy grants this ability in precisely the sense intended by the rule.

Here is Gets Hot regarding rerolls for weapons that do not roll to-hit:

If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit (including because of BS6+ or the Twin-linked special rule), a Wound is only suffered if the To Hit re-roll is also a 1; it may also re-roll Gets Hot results of 1 for weapons that do not roll To Hit.

As opposed to looking at the underlined, I recommend looking at the bolded.

The underlined establishes the relationship between Blasts rerolls and Gets Hot rerolls, as they follow the same standards.

No, they don't. The rule that you cited specifically goes on to talk about weapons (i.e., blast weapons) that do not roll To Hit in the ordinary way. Again, see the bolded.

To-Hit Dice are used when To-Hit Rolls are made.

To Hit dice are used when To Hit rolls are made for non-blast weapons. When blast weapons are used, the scatter dice are used instead, and 1d6 is rolled prior to rolling the scatter dice in order to determine gets hot results. Again, read the rules that you yourself cited.

Attacks using one of the templates do not roll To-Hit, therefore no To-Hit Dice are used.

Templates, as defined in the 40k rulebook, i.e., flamers, don't roll To Hit in any sense at all.

Gets Hot does not use To-Hit rolls when determining its state with weapons that do not roll To-Hit. A separate die is rolled, making any direct correlation for To-Hit rolls pointless.

I completely agree with all of this, but none of this is in dispute. What the gets hot rule for blast weapons says is that if you have the ability to reroll rolls To Hit, you may reroll a 1 result for gets hot. Preferred enemy grants this, since the result in question is a result of 1. Twin-linked also grants this, since it categorically permits re-rolls for failed results.

Instead, both Gets Hot and Blasts allow for rerolls of their condition when To-Hit rolls are not possible

Again, read the initial rule that you cited. The rule explicitly says that there is a sense in which blast weapons roll To Hit.

Once again, apply common sense when reading and interpreting the rules.

A pointless endeavor to this response, as it was simply stating that the perspective on Preferred Enemy is the same as for Twin-Linked, as they are both contingent on failure to apply a reroll. Preferred Enemy's reroll is just more specific. That is all. I was not taking sides on the debate itself, just clarifying the relationships.

Preferred enemy says that you can reroll 1s to hit.
Twin-link says that you may reroll all misses.

The rules don't say the same thing.

The reason preferred enemy applies to gets hot rolls is because of the following:

1. The gets hot rule says that if you have an ability to reroll rolls To Hit, you may apply that rule to a gets hot roll.
2. Weapons ordinarily get hot on a 1.
3. Preferred enemy lets you reroll results of 1 to hit.

If we were back in 5th edition and you were rapid firing a plasma gun, and you rolled a 2 (thereby triggering Gets Hot), preferred enemy wouldn't give you the ability to reroll that result.

It does just as much as Twin-Linked does. Both are conditional on failure. If one can reroll Gets Hot and Blasts, why cannot the other? The fact that Preferred Enemy requires a more specific failure is irrelevant, they both require failure to apply a reroll. In conditions where To-Hit rolls are not used, the standards should be the same.

I agree with the bolded. Both of the rules are conditional on failing a To Hit roll. Preferred enemy is conditional on failing a To Hit roll by rolling a 1, whereas Twin-Linked allows a reroll of any and all failures absolutely speaking.

Once again, a simple grasp of the simpliciter vs. relative distinction works wonders here.

Not sure. I'd have to look at all the rules side by side at this point.

" and chooses to do so after firing a Blast weapon"

There's no choice with preferred enemy. That's where this breaks down for me.

 Happyjew wrote:
Traditio, so it is your standpoint, that the only things that allow you to re-roll scatter is Twin-linked, and Ammo Runts?

My standpoint is that the only things that allow you to re-roll scatter are:

1. Rules which explicitly assert that you can reroll 1 or more misses, regardless of the number that you rolled to score that miss. Thus, if you have a master-crafted plasma cannon, by all means, re-roll those scatter dice.

2. Rules which explicitly assert that you may reroll the scatter dice.

It's an issue of general rerolls vs conditional rerolls. The blast marker procedure never fulfills the conditions to allow a reroll with preferred enemy under the rules for blast markers.

Martel732 wrote:
It's an issue of general rerolls vs conditional rerolls. The blast marker procedure never fulfills the conditions to allow a reroll with preferred enemy under the rules for blast markers.

Perfectly and concisely stated!

I also wish to point out that the BS 6 comparison breaks down. When you roll the scatter dice, you don't reroll misses with BS 6. You deduct 6 inches from the scatter result.

Traditio wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Traditio, so it is your standpoint, that the only things that allow you to re-roll scatter is Twin-linked, and Ammo Runts?

My standpoint is that the only things that allow you to re-roll scatter are:

1. Rules which explicitly assert that you can reroll 1 or more misses, regardless of the number that you rolled to score that miss. Thus, if you have a master-crafted plasma cannon, by all means, re-roll those scatter dice.

2. Rules which explicitly assert that you may reroll the scatter dice.

Regarding number 1, how are you re-rolling the scatter with master-crafted? You cannot meet the criteria of master-crafted of failing a To Hit roll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
It's an issue of general rerolls vs conditional rerolls. The blast marker procedure never fulfills the conditions to allow a reroll with preferred enemy under the rules for blast markers.

Except with the exception of Ammo Runts, every re-roll (including Twin-linked) is conditional. The only reason Twin-linked allows blasts to re-roll (without meeting the conditions) is because it specifically tells you how to resolve it.

Happyjew wrote:Regarding number 1, how are you re-rolling the scatter with master-crafted? You cannot meet the criteria of master-crafted of failing a To Hit roll.

I quote the rule cited by Charistoph (and, in fact, I encourage you to read my latest answer to him):

"If a model has the ability to re-roll its rolls To Hit and chooses to do so after firing a Blast weapon, the player must re-roll both the scatter dice and the 2D6."

Master crafted says that you can re-roll a single failed roll to hit.

Twin-linked says that you can re-roll all failed rolls to hit.

Preferred enemy says neither: it says to reroll 1s.

Except with the exception of Ammo Runts, every re-roll (including Twin-linked) is conditional.

It's conditional on missing.

Once again, apply common sense/attend to the spirit of the rules.

Martel732 wrote:
It's an issue of general rerolls vs conditional rerolls. The blast marker procedure never fulfills the conditions to allow a reroll with preferred enemy under the rules for blast markers.

All rerolls are conditional rerolls because all rerolls only reroll misses. Does that mean nothing in the game reroll scatter?

"Except with the exception of Ammo Runts, every re-roll (including Twin-linked) is conditional. The only reason Twin-linked allows blasts to re-roll (without meeting the conditions) is because it specifically tells you how to resolve it."

I will accept this interpretation before the one allowing preferred enemy to allow blast rerolls.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's an issue of general rerolls vs conditional rerolls. The blast marker procedure never fulfills the conditions to allow a reroll with preferred enemy under the rules for blast markers.

All rerolls are conditional rerolls because all rerolls only reroll misses. Does that mean nothing in the game reroll scatter?

Maybe.

 CrownAxe wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's an issue of general rerolls vs conditional rerolls. The blast marker procedure never fulfills the conditions to allow a reroll with preferred enemy under the rules for blast markers.

All rerolls are conditional rerolls because all rerolls only reroll misses. Does that mean nothing in the game reroll scatter?

Again, the most obvious solution to the problem is simply to understand that rolling the scatter dice is the roll to hit for a blast weapon. When considered in light of 5th edition, this should be obvious to anyone who isn't a rules-lawyering WAC min-maxer.

Regardless of the strict (scatter dice are NOT a to hit roll) or loose (scatter dice ARE a to hit roll), the preferred enemy rule does not fulfill the criteria under either interpretation.

Traditio wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's an issue of general rerolls vs conditional rerolls. The blast marker procedure never fulfills the conditions to allow a reroll with preferred enemy under the rules for blast markers.

All rerolls are conditional rerolls because all rerolls only reroll misses. Does that mean nothing in the game reroll scatter?

Again, the most obvious solution to the problem is simply to understand that rolling the scatter dice is the roll to hit for a blast weapon. When considered in light of 5th edition, this should be obvious to anyone who isn't a rules-lawyering WAC min-maxer.

Its 7ed. You can't bring up rules from two editions. Especially since not everyone has been playing since 5ed.

And if you want to get into the spirit of the rule, why does PE not work? It makes you more accurate against their preferred target. Why do they suddenly lose accuracy just because of the type of ammo they used?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
"Except with the exception of Ammo Runts, every re-roll (including Twin-linked) is conditional. The only reason Twin-linked allows blasts to re-roll (without meeting the conditions) is because it specifically tells you how to resolve it."

I will accept this interpretation before the one allowing preferred enemy to allow blast rerolls.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's an issue of general rerolls vs conditional rerolls. The blast marker procedure never fulfills the conditions to allow a reroll with preferred enemy under the rules for blast markers.

All rerolls are conditional rerolls because all rerolls only reroll misses. Does that mean nothing in the game reroll scatter?

Maybe.

If so then the rule is a broken rule that does nothing. But we know that they wouldn't put in a broken rule intentionally so we can only assume that they intended for the rule to work with conditional rerolls.

"But we know that they wouldn't put in a broken rule intentionally"

It's GW. Just like John Snow, we know nothing. I have an entire codex of broken rules that do nothing. So forgive me if I don't have much empathy here.

 CrownAxe wrote:
Its 7ed. You can't bring up rules from two editions. Especially since not everyone has been playing since 5ed.

I bring up 5th edition because it helps us to understand what GW had in mind when they were writing the rules for 6th and 7th editions. In 5th edition, blast weapons rolled to hit. In 6th, they changed it to rolling scatter dice. Furthermore, if you look at the rule cited by Charistoph, it's strongly implied that models firing blast weapons may reroll To Hit.

But they don't roll to hit dice. What should we conclude?

The scatter dice, for all rules intents and purposes, are the "to hit" dice for blast weapons.

And if you want to get into the spirit of the rule, why does PE not work?

Because PE and twin-linked aren't the same thing. PE isn't supposed to allow you to reroll all misses. PE is supposed to prevent critical failures.

It makes you more accurate against their preferred target. Why do they suddenly lose accuracy just because of the type of ammo they used?

1A. I agree that this is a flaw in the rules. PE should be amended to say that blast weapons can reroll results of 6 on the scatter dice. That said, it doesn't say that.

Alternatively:

1B: Because they're blast weapons. Blast weapons apparently are just less accurate in general.

2. PE still applies to blast weapons, since you can reroll 1s to wound.

Martel732 wrote:
"But we know that they wouldn't put in a broken rule intentionally"

It's GW. Just like John Snow, we know nothing. I have an entire codex of broken rules that do nothing. So forgive me if I don't have much empathy here.

There is a difference between "rule that works but is ineffective in practice" and "rule that is broken and never works"

GW may be bad at writing rules, but no game designer purposefully puts in rules that are completely broken and can never be used.

 CrownAxe wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"But we know that they wouldn't put in a broken rule intentionally"

It's GW. Just like John Snow, we know nothing. I have an entire codex of broken rules that do nothing. So forgive me if I don't have much empathy here.

There is a difference between "rule that works but is ineffective in practice" and "rule that is broken and never works"

GW may be bad at writing rules, but no game designer purposefully puts in rules that are completely broken and can never be used.

I'm not convinced that GW is not that bad. They are the sloppiest rules entity I have ever encountered.

Martel732 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"But we know that they wouldn't put in a broken rule intentionally"

It's GW. Just like John Snow, we know nothing. I have an entire codex of broken rules that do nothing. So forgive me if I don't have much empathy here.

There is a difference between "rule that works but is ineffective in practice" and "rule that is broken and never works"

GW may be bad at writing rules, but no game designer purposefully puts in rules that are completely broken and can never be used.

I'm not convinced that GW is not that bad. They are the sloppiest rules entity I have ever encountered.

I'm not saying that the rule can't be written in a broken way, I'm saying they can't have intended for it to be broken (they still could have accidentally written it in a broken way)

RAI is clear that it should be a functional rule, and the only way its functional is if it works with conditional rerolls.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not letting my opponents double dip on preferred enemy. They don't need any more advantages against me.

Martel732 wrote:
We'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not letting my opponents double dip on preferred enemy. They don't need any more advantages against me.

What annoys me most about it is just how counter-intuitive that reading is. Unless you are specifically trying to read the rules to maximize advantages for your army, that interpretation of the preferred enemy rule would simply never arise. You pretty much have to be a WAC kind of guy even to come up with that reading.

And let me be clear:

I run 8 missile launchers and 3 plasma cannons in my army. If that's how re-rolling 1s on blast weapons worked, that would greatly benefit my army.

The problem is that it's just obviously wrong and contrary to the intention of the writers of the rule.