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 Coteaz's Surprise network makes the opponent re-roll successful attempts to seize the initiative while Sicarius's Surprise attack allows you to re-roll to seize the initiative. Which one takes precedence? Thank you in advance.

I'd say dice off for which rule gets priority, since you can't have both because of the no re-rolling a re-roll (unless that has changed in 6th, should check that...) and they both concern the same thing.

Roll the first attempt to seize. Then re-roll it. Take the second result.

Or, just have the two abilities cancel each other out and roll with no re-rolls.

As above.

No conflict, just redundancy

Could just play that UM player HAS to reroll, 6 or not

Lobukia wrote:Could just play that UM player HAS to reroll, 6 or not

Which has the same effect as just assuming both powers cancel out, it just wastes time.

rigeld2 wrote:

Lobukia wrote:Could just play that UM player HAS to reroll, 6 or not

Which has the same effect as just assuming both powers cancel out, it just wastes time.

Not really, if I am the SM player and I do roll a 6, I seize... which ignores the GK's special ability.

To tell the truth, I'd just roll the die three times, if either of the last two are a "6" the UM player gets it, but if the first is a 6, that wouldn't count

Lobukia wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Lobukia wrote:Could just play that UM player HAS to reroll, 6 or not

Which has the same effect as just assuming both powers cancel out, it just wastes time.

Not really, if I am the SM player and I do roll a 6, I seize... which ignores the GK's special ability.

To tell the truth, I'd just roll the die three times, if either of the last two are a "6" the UM player gets it, but if the first is a 6, that wouldn't count

So the first roll has no chance of doing anything, and then the UM gets his two rolls? So since the first roll does nothing you might aswell not roll it... and then you want to give the UM his special rule and discard coteaz special rule.
Yeah, no.

motyak wrote:I'd say dice off for which rule gets priority, since you can't have both because of the no re-rolling a re-roll (unless that has changed in 6th, should check that...) and they both concern the same thing.

It's still there.


Here's my take:
You role the first die, right? If it's a 6, coteaz rule kicks in, if it's 1-5, the UM rule kicks in. So only one of the rules are ever going to kick in on that roll.
Either way it's a reroll. And there is no rerolling a reroll. Only that first roll is affected by both of the rules, but not both at once. So if you look at it, you can do both rolls, but in effect they are nullifying eachother. So no point in rolling both.

Purifier wrote:Here's my take:
You role the first die, right? If it's a 6, coteaz rule kicks in, if it's 1-5, the UM rule kicks in. So only one of the rules are ever going to kick in on that roll.
Either way it's a reroll. And there is no rerolling a reroll. Only that first roll is affected by both of the rules, but not both at once. So if you look at it, you can do both rolls, but in effect they are nullifying eachother. So no point in rolling both.

This seems to hit it pretty spot on. There's really only two cases (to elaborate on the above):

Case 1: The UM player rolls to seize and fails. At this point, Coteaz's rule is irrelevant, because either the GK player forces the UM player to re-roll that result (which would be bizarre), or the UM player re-rolls the result via Sicarius' ability. Either way, the UM player gets a re-roll. After that, the die cannot be re-rolled again, so no triggering Coteaz after the UM player triggers Sicarius.

Case 2: The UM player rolls to seize and succeeds. At this point, Sicarius' rule is irrelevant because either the UM player chooses to re-roll that result (again, bizarre), or the GK player forces the UM player to re-roll the result via Coteaz's ability. Either way, the UM player re-rolls the result, and again, it cannot be re-rolled after that.

So the two rules don't conflict, they simply both cause a re-roll. In this case, the players can agree to simply take the first roll, or to actually roll twice. Statistically both ways of playing work the same way.