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.

So does anyone find it odd that in the new rule they mention failed to hit rolls as rolls of 1 would always fail? If you read it in that way its reroll failed to hit rolls as well as wound rolls of 1. Im guessing gw will need to faq this but Im curious what everyone thinks anyways. Also how many people feel given wording problems and general confusion tha this book seems a bit rushed?

The wording is a bit odd, but they are saying that to hit rolls of a 1 can be re-rolled.

(They could have left out the failed part as all rolls to hit of a 1 are failed).