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.

In a game vs. daemons Eldrad practically won the game for me, by that I mean runes of mindrape.....I mean warding won the game for me. One time when Kairos was trying to do some hokus pokus Runes of rape kicked in and he rolled 6,6,2. Does this means he periled twice? One from runes of warding special rules and 1 from rolling double 6, that's how me played it. It made him an easy warlord point when he didn't dare do any more magic because he was too scared of dying!

Come on man... Lets try and use the word Rape a little less ¬¬....


And i'd say no, as doesn't the rule for runes of Warding say that they suffer perils on a double 1, 6 or getting more than a 12?

Errata from the FAQ: (Since someone mentioned the wording...)
Page 26 – Runes of Warding.
Change the last sentence to: “All enemy Psykers must roll an extra dice when taking Psychic tests, suffering Perils of the Warp on any roll of 12 or above.”

This doesn't strictly say that it replaces the standard Perils circumstances (I don't have a RAW argument to say it does), but this is the first time I've heard of anyone that plays it that both the Runes and standard Perils both apply.

Hmm...

I'd say its only on the roll of 12 or more then imo

pretty sure you can only suffer Perils once per test,.

Pretty sure that when you make a Psychic Test, you suffer a single Perils of the Warp if you meet any of the Perils conditions, not one per. Never seen it run any other way.

When you roll 3D6, you cannot roll double 1's, since there are three dice involved. You can roll TRIPLE 1's, but that is not what triggers a Perils, per BRB p67.

Runes of Warding causes a Perils on a 3D6 roll of 12+, but does not cause Perils on a 3D6 roll of 3. The Perils section in the BRB is contingent on the fact that only two dice are involved. Having a result on 3D6 negates the normal guidelines for Perils.

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
When you roll 3D6, you cannot roll double 1's, since there are three dice involved. You can roll TRIPLE 1's, but that is not what triggers a Perils, per BRB p67.

Rolling three dice can still net you a double, and the Perils rule says "double 1" not "total of 2". As an example (from a different system but hey) in WHFB when casting spells a "double 6" is important regardless of how many dice you are rolling.

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
When you roll 3D6, you cannot roll double 1's, since there are three dice involved. You can roll TRIPLE 1's, but that is not what triggers a Perils, per BRB p67.

Runes of Warding causes a Perils on a 3D6 roll of 12+, but does not cause Perils on a 3D6 roll of 3. The Perils section in the BRB is contingent on the fact that only two dice are involved. Having a result on 3D6 negates the normal guidelines for Perils.

You CAN, in fact, roll double 1s on a 3d6. It's when you roll 2 1's, and there is nothing on p67 that implies perils only happens if all the dice rolled are 1s or 6s (in fact, it uses the very specific language "double 1" and "double 6", i.e., having 2 dice turn up as 1 or having 2 dice turn up as 6)

Rihgu wrote:

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
When you roll 3D6, you cannot roll double 1's, since there are three dice involved. You can roll TRIPLE 1's, but that is not what triggers a Perils, per BRB p67.

Runes of Warding causes a Perils on a 3D6 roll of 12+, but does not cause Perils on a 3D6 roll of 3. The Perils section in the BRB is contingent on the fact that only two dice are involved. Having a result on 3D6 negates the normal guidelines for Perils.

You CAN, in fact, roll double 1s on a 3d6. It's when you roll 2 1's, and there is nothing on p67 that implies perils only happens if all the dice rolled are 1s or 6s (in fact, it uses the very specific language "double 1" and "double 6", i.e., having 2 dice turn up as 1 or having 2 dice turn up as 6)

Although any 3d6 roll could never be just a double. It would always be the double and then whatever the extra dice is.... There is obviously a difference between double 1 + 3 and just a double 1. Looks like it's just something that will have to be decided before the game starts.

At least we can again roll invul saves versus Perils, per the current BRB FAQ.

On subject, 3d6 can still net Double 1's and double 6's. However, the wording of the "Runes of Warding" special rule does override the normal Perils condition, as it replaces the values of Double 1's or 6's with 12+ (a likely chance on 3d6). If the wording stated we should follow all rules for Perils in the BRB with the addition that any roll of 12 or more will also Peril, then all three conditions would apply. As is, the 12+ condition replaces the Doubles condition in this case.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
At least we can again roll invul saves versus Perils, per the current BRB FAQ.

Mind specifying where this is in the FaQ, I can not find it.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
At least we can again roll invul saves versus Perils, per the current BRB FAQ.

Mind specifying where this is in the FaQ, I can not find it.

BRB FAQ 1.4 (April 13), 1st page, in pink:

Page 17 – Invulnerable Saves
Change the second paragraph to “Invulnerable saves are
different to armour saves because they may always be taken
whenever the model suffers a Wound or, in the case of vehicles,
suffers a penetrating or glancing hit – the Armour Piercing
value of attacking weapons has no effect upon an Invulnerable
save. Even if a Wound, penetrating hit or glancing hit ignores
all armour saves, an invulnerable save can still be taken”.

Last I checked, Perils inflicts a wound on a model. Per the above quote, invul saves are now allowed versus all wounds suffered by a model.

SJ

The FAQ added in the ability for vehicles to take Invulns.
The rest of the wording is as it has been.
Perils still allows "no saves of any kind," which still includes Invulns.

My question to him way 'why not?'. This probably wasn't the right thing to say an all (something about a permissive rule set I don't understand) but its a good question. Nothing in the runes of warding says it over rides normal perils, nore does it say that perils can only be incurred once. In the rule book it says if a double 1 or 6 is rolled, it doesn't say that those dice are the only dice that may be rolled.

So the way I see it is there is no reason why he wouldn't take double perils, so that's why he did. Is this wrong?

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Last I checked, Perils inflicts a wound on a model. Per the above quote, invul saves are now allowed versus all wounds suffered by a model.

SJ

That would work, except perils says no saves of any kind are allowed, so you can not take invuln saves against perils.

I thought there was something specific you were talking about.

I think the wording of SitW is key here -

"suffer a Perils of the Warp attack on the roll of any double 1 or double 6."

Now, without the little "a" there, an argument could be made that a model that rolls trip 1's would suffer 3 Perils of the Warp (1 for each double). However, the wording is that regardless of how many double 1's or double 6's you roll you still only suffer 1 PotW.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
At least we can again roll invul saves versus Perils, per the current BRB FAQ.

On subject, 3d6 can still net Double 1's and double 6's. However, the wording of the "Runes of Warding" special rule does override the normal Perils condition, as it replaces the values of Double 1's or 6's with 12+ (a likely chance on 3d6). If the wording stated we should follow all rules for Perils in the BRB with the addition that any roll of 12 or more will also Peril, then all three conditions would apply. As is, the 12+ condition replaces the Doubles condition in this case.

SJ

Sorry, I guess I'm confused. I looked at Runes of Warding again, and I can't find where it says that it overrides the normal Perils condition. I just found the part where it says 'suffering a Perils of the Warp attack on any roll of 12 or above.' I grant that it adds to the normal set of Perils conditions, but I don't see how that replaces the normal set of circumstances. Am I just being unreasonable, or are other people seeing it that way, too? Sorry, I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I've been all fired up about adding some Eldar allies, and this would be a fly in my ointment...

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
When you roll 3D6, you cannot roll double 1's, since there are three dice involved. You can roll TRIPLE 1's, but that is not what triggers a Perils, per BRB p67.

Runes of Warding causes a Perils on a 3D6 roll of 12+, but does not cause Perils on a 3D6 roll of 3. The Perils section in the BRB is contingent on the fact that only two dice are involved. Having a result on 3D6 negates the normal guidelines for Perils.

This.

BRB says the roll IS a double 6. 6, 6, 2 is not a double 6, although it contains one.

As opposed to Shadows in the Warp, which is worded slightly differently, and would cause perils on 6, 6, 2 but not on 6, 5, 4.