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.

OK, this may take a little explaining on my part, as I am not totally certain on the concensus on this rule.

Premise being:

2 Jokaero in a squad.
Deploy the squad.
Roll one D6 for customisations.
You roll a 6 = "The Works".
You roll two more dice, and roll two 3's. (Which would be two "Rending" results I believe)
This means you have rolled a duplicate result, which the rules say to "ignore".

NOW is where the issue crops up in my mind. Seems to be two ways this can go next:

A)
The duplicate result is ignored, which by definition means that you should treat it as if it did not exist, and had never happened. And as the roll never happened, you still have a roll to make on the customisation chart, and so you roll again (until you get a result other than "Rending" anyway).

B)
The duplicate roll is accepted, but as you can not take two identical customisations you simply lose out on a second customisation. Bad luck.

Ok... so, from what I can see on the internets, from other forums etc, version B seems to be the one that people agree with. However, I cant see how that is the case myself, as the rules clearly say to "ignore duplicate results", not to accept them as a failure.

This of course has no bearing on the FAQ, as that example is only about having too many jokaeros so that you can only get results of a 6+ every time, which would obviously leave you in an infinite loop of nothing.

So yeh, am I missing something? Or is it just that my grasp of the english language is ....shall we say different to the language GW employees speak lol

Thanks anyway, just that this has been bothering me a bit.

I know that in fantasy when rolling for spells if you get two of the same roll you get the result plus you get to choose with the reduntant dice which spell you take so that is more like A.

but given my experiences and general feel from the 40k ruleset I would think that B is probably the way it is played.

dajobe wrote:I know that in fantasy when rolling for spells if you get two of the same roll you get the result plus you get to choose with the reduntant dice which spell you take so that is more like A.

but given my experiences and general feel from the 40k ruleset I would think that B is probably the way it is played.

B does (from what I have read in forums anyway) seem to be the one people play, if only to prevent arguements with non-GK players.
However, from my understanding of the english language, and RAW, A seems to be much more accurate.

The added problem with B is that, even if you only have a single Jokaero (where rolling a 1 means you get nothing)... if you roll a 6 (for the works), and then proceed to roll two more 6's... you get nothing.

And rolling three 6's in a row is barely ever cause for penalisation! Especially not when it comes to upgrades and such.

B is exactly how it is supposed to work.
And FAQ has bearing on this, as the whole reason you don't get any bonuses is that duplicate results are ignored.

B is also the RAW. It's the result from the table that is being ignored, not the roll itself.

Luide wrote:B is exactly how it is supposed to work.
And FAQ has bearing on this, as the whole reason you don't get any bonuses is that duplicate results are ignored.

Actually I would disagree, the FAQ (to me) is just clarifying that when you have too many Jokaero, it becomes impossible to get any usable results, rather than anything to do with duplicates.

Luide wrote:
B is also the RAW. It's the result from the table that is being ignored, not the roll itself.

However *this* I can understand, as you are correct, it does say to ignore results, and not ignore the roll itself....
Although I would still argue that accepting the result as a failure is still *not* ignoring it.

Niiru wrote:

Luide wrote:
B is also the RAW. It's the result from the table that is being ignored, not the roll itself.

However *this* I can understand, as you are correct, it does say to ignore results, and not ignore the roll itself....
Although I would still argue that accepting the result as a failure is still *not* ignoring it.

Duplicate result is not accepted as failure. It is just ignored.

For example, if you roll following upgrades from the table:
6 The Works (applied)
2 Improved Gun Sights (applied)
2 Improved Gun Sights (This upgrade is already applied once. Thus this duplicate result is ignored instead of it being applied to the unit)

"Roll twice more on the table and apply both results. Each upgrade can only be applied once - ignore duplicate results (including duplicate rolls of 6)." (C:GK, pg 50) is the relevant rule

I do see where you're coming from, but unfortunately it's pretty clear that they would have written the rule differently if they wanted "The Works" to be always beneficial.

Yeh this does make sense, originally I did think of it more like "ignore the roll" rather than "ignore the result".

Unfortunatly this does mean Jokaeros change from being well priced (points-wise) to being overpriced, as the chance of getting nothing is a lot higher than I originally thought.

I'll still probably take two of them in one of my henchmen squads, just because I like having a wildcard feature lol. Just a shame that they will only be worth their points cost in... I cant be bothered to do the maths, but something like 1 in every 8 or so games.

Yeah, it does mean that taking more than 2 is detriment, not an asset.

For two/one/zero useful results, your chances are following:
1 jokaero: 6 % / 76 % / 17 %
2 jokearo: 11 % / 85 % / 4 %
3 jokaero: 8 % / 79 % / 13 %
4 jokaero: 4% / 67% / 30 %

Luide wrote:Yeah, it does mean that taking more than 2 is detriment, not an asset.

Unless you really want 3 or more lascannons/multi-meltas/heavy flamers, of course. It would quickly become ridiculously expensive, but amusing nonetheless.

DoW

The Planet of the Apes army is always a hoot to play against.

Coteaz and 72 Jokearo(and 6 Chimeras)

Grey Templar wrote:The Planet of the Apes army is always a hoot to play against.

Coteaz and 72 Jokearo(and 6 Chimperas)

Fixed for you.

I'll leave now.

Niiru.... you win

Grey Templar wrote:The Planet of the Apes army is always a hoot to play against.

Coteaz and 72 Jokearo(and 6 Chimeras)

But it comes to 2500 points at least, just go for Coteaz and 30 Jokero in 6 Chimeras!

BewareOfTom wrote:Niiru.... you win

what do I win? the bad pun trophy? woop!

nope, YOU'RE DEATH!!!!

BewareOfTom wrote:nope, YOU'RE DEATH!!!!

He won him being death?

That's... a pretty awesome reward.

Unless you meant "YOUR DEATH!!!!" which has a totally different meaning.

Niiru wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:The Planet of the Apes army is always a hoot to play against.

Coteaz and 72 Jokearo(and 6 Chimperas)

Fixed for you.

I'll leave now.

LOL

i would love to see this army especially if a chimera has a built in audio player with planet of the apes quotes.

and to the OP ignore the second result

rigeld2 wrote:He won him being death?

maybe you should win the same thing with you gooder grammar

/forthelulz