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.

I think the best example of needing to roll it out is the mastercrafted thunderhammers of C:SM thanks to Vulkan.

Back when, a LOT of people just liked to rolls all the dice together to hit, count out how many terminators there were left alive, and then reroll those many dice to account for each marine's postulated master-crafted re-roll.

Thing is, that always assumed the misses were distributed out ACROSS the unit evenly, allowing each marine one re-roll likewise.

Realistically, what SHOULD have been happening was that some marines would have all hits, thus not getting ANY re-roll, while other would have all misses, but they SHOULD have been entitled to just their ONE re-roll per model.

Nowadays, most all recognize this fact and insist in be played out straight.

Likewise, there really are situations where there's simply no reason to roll all the weapons out individually. I.E- lightning claws that ALL get to re-roll to wound ALL their wounds.

The rule of thumb is that when there are uniformly shared gains and losses without specification to the individual model, they can be rack-rolled. In those situations where there are important indvidual factors in play, i.e Gets Hot, those weapons and hits need to be rolled out per model.

In the case of the latter, there's no problem with rolling 2 dice for a single TL-gets hot weapon as hit or miss on either die, the gets hot effect is only important if both are 1.

The Dragon wrote:In the case of the latter, there's no problem with rolling 2 dice for a single TL-gets hot weapon as hit or miss on either die, the gets hot effect is only important if both are 1.

Not quite, as has been said in this thread. Assuming a BS of 4, a 1 or a 2 would be a miss. Rolling the 1 first and then the 2 would result in no 'Gets Hot!' but rolling the 2 and then the 1... that makes a difference. It doubles the amount of 'Gets Hot!' results compare to what you suggested.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:Well crap... I've been doing this 40K thing all wrong... Who cares about the rules, I'll just tweak them till they make sense for me. "Deathwing Assault"? well, obviously, that means I get to assault out of a Deathwing deep strike. Maybe I'll take apothecary upgrades in all my squads, because that would make my game run sooooo much better.

Wow... can't believe I actually read that the rules themselves were not a compelling enough reason to follow the rules...

Hyperbole much?

The difference between your examples and the original issue is that yours actually make a difference to how the game works. Following a rule just for the sake of following the rules is reasonably pointless when there is another way of doing it that is easier and winds up with the exact same outcome.

That's not saying that following the rules is bad, or wrong. Just that altering the rules in that situation shouldn't be a big deal.

EVERYBODY's maths is wrong because probability calculations are done by working out the chance of failure and deducting it from 1. We are all of us used to doing the calculations the other way, and it doesn't always work.

Probability of a miss or a hit = 1 (by definition -- you can only either hit or miss)

Probability of missing with a twin linked weapon on BS3
You have to miss on the first roll, which is 1,2,3 out of 6 = 0.5
Then you have to miss on the second roll too, this also = 0.5 but you have to miss the first roll before you are allowed to try the second.

In this situation the two probabilities are multiplied together.

The real probability of missing the second roll -- and therefore actually missing -- is 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25

1 - 0.25 = 0.75

Therefore you have a 75% chance to hit with a twin-linked weapon on BS3.

Reecius wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:So you're telling me that having more objects around for the dice to bounce and reflect off of doesn't skew the potential results at all? I'm sure it doesn't change the odds, obviously, but it could most certainly affect the outcome as you add more variables of chaos into the mix.

Yes. Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. Dropping two dice at once as opposed to one die followed by another gives you the EXACT same range of possibilities. The EXACT same. The amount of time that passes between the dice falling makes absolutely, no difference. A die will always give you a result of between 1 and 6 irregardless of how many dice are tossed or how much time has passed between the throwing of one and another. It is a total moot point to regard how the two dice falling will impact the results as they will STILL give you a result of between 1 and 6 no matter how many things they hit on the way to resting. Following that logic, you must always throw each die individually in order to prevent some kind of imaginary interference. Tell that to Ork players! One attack at a time please!

And I am not trying to mock you here at all, it is just that your argument is like saying, multiplying 2x3 isn't the same thing as saying 2+2+2. I can understand that it may seem more complex than it is, but in reality it is very simple.

A more likely scenario is if they rolled a 6 and a 1 and claimed the 6 was first so the 1 doesn't count.

What difference does it make if the 1 wold have been the first die or the second?
*Snip*

First, you and insaniak seemingly do not understand the difference between odds and variables, just because you have a 50/50 chance of getting something does not mean that external factors didn't play a part in the outcome for that specific point in time. Again, people thinking too linear and not outside of the box.

Secondly, about the twin linked 6 and 1. I take it you did not see the entire point that it was for a GETS HOT! weapon, in which case it absolutely does matter if the 1 was rolled first or second. Since, as you said, if the 6 was rolled first then the 1 never happened so they don't have a take a wound. but if the 1 was rolled first they would have to re-roll it AND take a wound for GETS HOT!.

Kilkrazy wrote:EVERYBODY's maths is wrong because probability calculations are done by working out the chance of failure and deducting it from 1. We are all of us used to doing the calculations the other way, and it doesn't always work.

Probability of a miss or a hit = 1 (by definition -- you can only either hit or miss)

Probability of missing with a twin linked weapon on BS3
You have to miss on the first roll, which is 1,2,3 out of 6 = 0.5
Then you have to miss on the second roll too, this also = 0.5 but you have to miss the first roll before you are allowed to try the second.

In this situation the two probabilities are multiplied together.

The real probability of missing the second roll -- and therefore actually missing -- is 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25

1 - 0.25 = 0.75

Therefore you have a 75% chance to hit with a twin-linked weapon on BS3.

Actually, thats exactly what I did on page 2

Kevin - no, when you reroll a "1" on a gets hot! weapon you do NOT take a wound for gets hot. As the rules for rerolls tell you the first dice roll NEVER counts for anything - therefore it cannot trigger gets hot!

It is a common misconception, but think of it logically - if it did count then the reroll could never do anything useful. The first missed shot will always miss, the first failed leadership check would still make you run away, and so on.

Isn't there only a single character that has a twin-linked plasma pistol or whatever it is? Since vehicles don't suffer from Get's Hot! (I seem to recall hearing about some Space Marine vehicle getting twinlinked plasma guns on a sponson or somesuch) it seems like a fairly pointless thing to worry about.

I believe the original argument against rolling both die for the theoretical twinlinked get's hot weapon was if it rolled two misses, and one was a one. You could have either rolled a one, then a two, or a two, then a one, and in the latter case would take a wound. In any other case, so long as each shot is clearly delineated (each shot using a differently colored pair of dice), there's no appreciable difference between rolling them simultaneously and rolling them separately.

Kevin949 wrote:First, you and insaniak seemingly do not understand the difference between odds and variables, just because you have a 50/50 chance of getting something does not mean that external factors didn't play a part in the outcome for that specific point in time. Again, people thinking too linear and not outside of the box.

No, I understand the difference just fine.

The thing is, the variables are irrelevant, since if you always roll your twin-linked dice together, the variables are the same each time. So the odds remain the same each time you roll.

That's if you even consider rolling 2 dice instead of one as adding in a variable that makes a discernible difference to the roll in the first place. Particularly in a game that is designed around the concept of rolling great handfulls of dice at every opportunity anyway.

Reecius wrote:The only reason this has expanded to two pages is because people here apparently have difficulty understanding elementary level mathematics and probability.

So, out of the choices "this is confusing" or "dozens of people who have played the game for years are dumb", you went with the latter?

Lets do try this a different way. Lets say I have a hypothetical Awesome Cannon (not to be confused with the Awesome Blood Cannon, which I think is a real thing in the last BA codex).Lets say it's a Twin Linked assault 3 weapon, that hits on a 4+.

I can either:

A.) Roll 3 dice, one of which missed, and then pick up the miss and re-roll it, or

B.) Roll 6 dice. They would obviously need to be 6 different colors, since they have to be paired. So, a blue die to hit, and a red die for the re-roll on the blue die if needed, and a green die, and a yellow die for the re-roll on green if needed, and a black dice, and a white die for the re-roll on the black dice if needed. That's pretty easy to remember and explain, right? Not even a little confusing, and bound to save lots of time in the twice I fire this cannon per game, not counting, of course, the 5 minutes of explaining this needlessly complex system.

Unless your idea is you roll 3 red dice to hit, and 3 white dice to re-roll? That's an awesome idea. Look, I got a miss on the red to-hit die, but I rolled 3 white die at the same time, and one of those was a hit! Hence, the one that hit correlates to the one that missed. I bet that would happen nearly every single time, as a matter of fact.

Unless the idea is, for the above example, to roll a pair of different colored dice, then a pair of different colored dice, then a pair of different colored dice, to represent each shot + reroll? That replaced one roll + one re-roll with 3 seperate rolls, so no efficiency gain there.

How much time do you actually "waste", per game, playing the way the rules say in re-rolling missed dies - in minutes? How many minutes will you save using this convoluted system?

You only need 3 pairs of coloured dice, not 6 individual dice. ASsuming no "gets hot!" the order is irrelevant to the probability.

{W,W, B, B, R, R} for example, is equivalent to {W,W}, {B,B}, {R,R} rolled seperately. You have thus reduced yourself back down to the single shot, twin linked situation repeated 3 times, which has already been proven to not make any difference whether you roll 1 or 2 dice.

Takes no time to explain, not if you know the people and you all play similarly. You assume it will always be against new people, which unless you only play tournaments is unlikely in the extreme.

Sir P - quite a few things have twin linked guns, e.g. obliterators, IG issued tghe "bring it down!" order, etc.

I doubt anyone has made a serious scientific study of the time spent rolling three dice, then rerolling misses, compared to the time spent rolling six dice, and removing the misses.

I don't believe there would be any significant difference over the course of a game.

nosferatu1001 wrote:IG issued tghe "bring it down!" order, etc.

Oh, forgot about that.

nosferatu1001 wrote:You only need 3 pairs of coloured dice, not 6 individual dice. ASsuming no "gets hot!" the order is irrelevant to the probability.

{W,W, B, B, R, R} for example, is equivalent to {W,W}, {B,B}, {R,R} rolled seperately. You have thus reduced yourself back down to the single shot, twin linked situation repeated 3 times, which has already been proven to not make any difference whether you roll 1 or 2 dice.

Takes no time to explain, not if you know the people and you all play similarly. You assume it will always be against new people, which unless you only play tournaments is unlikely in the extreme.

Sir P - quite a few things have twin linked guns, e.g. obliterators, IG issued tghe "bring it down!" order, etc.

Ok, this makes a lot more sense.

Grakmar wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Forgotmytea wrote:

Smolo82 wrote:I choose a different die when the first one misses though, anyone else? Can't trust that missing lil bastard of a die.

It's reassuring to know that I'm not alone

Don't forget if the die rolled low to miss then it needs to roll a high number to regress to the mean, so it's better to use the same die for the re-roll.

Law of averages.

Spoiler:

That is a joke.

Sorry Kilkrazy, that is an urban legend.

The truth is that once a die starts rolling poorly, it's usually because it's run out of "mojo". And, unfortunately, the only way to refill a die's mojo is to sacrifice a miniature using a mallet or hammer.

Or you could steal it from Autsin Powers.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:Always roll them together to teach people math.

It can be done rolling both dice at once but it does fall apart or can lead to confusion as the rerolls increase.

Say TL- HB fires. I roll 3 sets of 2 same colored dice. (say red, white and blue.) I need a 3 to hit so if just one of each set of two is 3+ I have a hit. I can't get confused and say count the two 4s on blue dice as both hits covering for two 2s on the red set.

If you can't come up with easily identified sets of two dice though, you have to follow the rules. (e.g. 20 hormagaunts with toxin sacs and adrenal glands have managed 30 hits on a tactical marine squad. Because their strength and poison rules qualifies for rerolls to wound, you would need 30 pairs of unique dice. In this case I would prefer roll 30 to wound and reroll those that failed.)

For me if it saves time but it doesn't confuse it is fine.

Pairing dice also is a bad idea if you ever have something like Pathfinders AP1 rule or something like rending in play.
Then it is imperative you know the sequential order of the role. You can't roll 2 dice to not only represent a reroll to hit or wound where the die result might improve the value of the attack.

e.g. Pathfinders under GUIDE effects. They hit on a 3+ but if they hit with a 5+ it is AP1. As long as the 1st result is a 3+ you hit and can't reroll. So if you rolled a pair of dice and rolled a 4 and a 6, you would have no way to determine which was the first roll and couldn't claim the bonus effect of hitting with a 5+.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Kevin - no, when you reroll a "1" on a gets hot! weapon you do NOT take a wound for gets hot. As the rules for rerolls tell you the first dice roll NEVER counts for anything - therefore it cannot trigger gets hot!

It is a common misconception, but think of it logically - if it did count then the reroll could never do anything useful. The first missed shot will always miss, the first failed leadership check would still make you run away, and so on.

You're right, I was thinking of rapid fire. My bad.

I'm sorry if anyone here thought I was implying they were dumb, that wasn't my intent.

This is a silly argument anyway, play to accommodate your opponent. If they really don't like it one way or another, then big deal, roll with it and enjoy the game.

Peace!

Oh the thing about the plasma now I get.

Yep they're right you CAN NOT double roll TL-plasma because of gets hot because of this.

Roll 1, then roll anything else = no problem. The re-roll overwrites anything previous

Roll a miss, THEN seeking a hit you re-roll and in fact roll a 1... well then you have problems.

If you double-rolled you'd always be able to say that any errant ones that showed up OBVIOUSLY had to have occurred as the first roll ... because it sucks for you.

Unfortunately, that's neither fair or legal to your opponent because you're skimming off GetsHot! checks you SHOULD HAVE HAD TO TAKE.

I hadn't previously considered the time-sequence option of a miss leading to the re-roll and subsuquent roll of 1. In hindsight, it's blaringly obvious.

On the 2d6 vs 1d6, another 1d6 if miss example it looks like it improves your odds because the sample size is smaller but the overall probability of hitting remains the same.

Actually, the best simplification of rolling a TL weapon from a BS3 model for a non-gets hot is the following:

Roll a D4 for each shot. Anything that is 2+ is a hit. This allows you to potentially roll an entire Blob squad under "Bring it down" without having to bother with pairing dice or re-rolling anything! That can be a huge timesaver!

Unfortunately, TL with anything other than BS3 doesn't work out to nice numbers, so there's no easy simplification for them.

Augustus wrote:

Polonius wrote:Even for single shot weapons, it bothers me in a completely irrational way that i can't explain.

That may be because they are different odds, because they are different events, it is wrong and it does change the odds.

For simplicity lets reduce the example to a BS3, hitting on a 4+, 50%, then we can simulate the to hit roll with a coin toss, also lets assume a shingle shot and heads hits.

With a simultaneous 2 coin toss there are 4 results:

HH
HT
TH
TT

Three of which hit, this makes the odds of hitting 3/4, or .75.

The correct way, when the second coin is only flipped if the first one fails there are only 3 combinations:

H
TH
TT

2 of these combinations hit, the odds of hitting are 2/3 or .66

Rolling 2 dice simultaneously is a cheat and it improves the odds of success by about 10 percent. Play the rules as written.

sourclams wrote:For single shot weapons rolling two dice is fine.

Actually it's not.

The math on this (where you indicate that rolling simultaneously affects the odds) is actually incorrect, but valuable for the discussion nonetheless:

The chance of rolling TH and TT are much lower than the chance of rolling heads (chance of rolling heads is 50%), lower enough that if you add them together you wind up with the total hit chance of 75%, not 66%

Heads and tails make a good example for this - 50% of your flips are heads, 50% of your flips are "flip again" - 50% of THOSE are "Hit" and 50% are miss - so your total odds are 50% heads, 50% (either TH or TT) so your 'miss' (TT) result is a 25% chance (50% of your 'flip again', which has a base chance in this example of 50%), giving you a 75% total hit.

HBMC's "Gambler's fallacy" is also incorrect, as this isn't an issue of dice influencing one another so much as it is a legitimate misinterpretation of a sample space on the part of Augustus (and others).

And really unless you roll your dice like a Skeeball player you shouldn't be saving a noticeable amount (>1 second) of time doing this. Enough time that this forum topic on the subject has collectively consumed enough of to make the whole attempt at time-saving worthless for everyone on the planet that tries to do it for the next decade or so.

Edit SUPER TURBO NINJA READ THE THREAD

Hopefully I made it easier to understand

I agreed with that whole post, except the following little bits:

MikeMcSomething wrote:And really unless you roll your dice like a Skeeball player you shouldn't be saving a noticeable amount (>1 second) of time doing this. .

If you give the die a proper roll it does take a couple of seconds; a second or so to roll and settle, and another second or so to retrieve it. Assuming it doesn't go off the table or under a model or something, which adds more time.

MikeMcSomething wrote:Enough time that this forum topic on the subject has collectively consumed enough of to make the whole attempt at time-saving worthless for everyone on the planet that tries to do it for the next decade or so.

Except that we're not trying to save a few minutes of our lifespan, we're trying to save a few minutes of (quite limited and precious) time at the table.

if you really must save time because you are playing Eldar (see fortune and doom)...

... simple, even works on gets hot so long as you take the dice inside as being the second roll ...

Tri wrote:if you really must save time because you are playing Eldar (see fortune and doom)...

... simple, even works on gets hot so long as you take the dice inside as being the second roll ...

We have a winner!

Tri wrote:if you really must save time because you are playing Eldar (see fortune and doom)...

... simple, even works on gets hot so long as you take the dice inside as being the second roll ...

+100!

that is actually pretty cool....

I have never minded for someone to roll two dice for twin-link. It keep the game at a good pace.

Kevin949 wrote:First, you and insaniak seemingly do not understand the difference between odds and variables, just because you have a 50/50 chance of getting something does not mean that external factors didn't play a part in the outcome for that specific point in time. Again, people thinking too linear and not outside of the box.

What?

Ouze wrote:So, out of the choices "this is confusing" or "dozens of people who have played the game for years are dumb", you went with the latter?

Reecius claimed some people didn't understand basic probabilities. That's a fair claim in light of the mathematics showcased in this thread.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Well crap... I've been doing this 40K thing all wrong... Who cares about the rules, I'll just tweak them till they make sense for me. "Deathwing Assault"? well, obviously, that means I get to assault out of a Deathwing deep strike. Maybe I'll take apothecary upgrades in all my squads, because that would make my game run sooooo much better.

Wow... can't believe I actually read that the rules themselves were not a compelling enough reason to follow the rules...

Why hello, Frazzled!