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.

Spite for those who look through my history for blackmail.

No, and the result is statistically the same as chucking them all at once.

Uh... Is there a difference? It's the same probability and there really isn't any time space manipulation for the theorem.

If the unit has the same armor saves the method for rolling is all the saves at once.

The only exception is mixed save units. It's in the book.. it may be only a guideline but pit your man pants on and tell him to stop it if it's bothering you.

Lookup mixed armor saves

It's a superstition, and a common one, that if you throw a dozen dice at once, you'll see more ones because the chances are higher, but if you throw each single die, it's a one in six chance. Barely any chance, right? It's an incorrect superstition, but that's what some people think and likely the reason. You can always tell them to hurry up but some folks have their traditions and won't appreciate you stepping on them.

I roll one at a time, but only on my FNP models, since you can technically stack wounds on one model until he's dead.

This is what I'd normally do with mixed saves, but thinking about it surely its advantageous.

EG. you have a 2+ save and four 3+ saves in a squad and take 6 wounds which, by positioning are taken on the 2+ save guy.

lets say you roll one at a time and get 5,4,3,2,2,1, you would only loose one guy cause he saved all the rolls before the 1 despite there being some 2's in there as well which a 3+ save would fail.

But if you roll them all at the same time there is no order they're rolled in and therefore would two 3+ save people die as well?

Not sure if that made sense... but meh

To be fair, the argument that rolling one die at a time is exactly the same as rolling lots of dice at once depends on the assumption that the person rolling the dice isn't cheating. It's a lot easier to cheat with a single die than with a whole handful, whether it's by having a single "special" die that is biased in the right direction or by various tricks that let you appear to "roll" a die without actually rolling it randomly. If my opponent insisted on rolling one die at a time even in situations where you can just grab a handful of dice I'd probably suspect that there's more to it than just a silly superstition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Taffy17 wrote:
{example}

No, that's not a case of advantage vs. disadvantage, it's just a case of not following the rules correctly. You are explicitly required to roll saves one at a time when you have a unit with mixed saves, so that you know when all of the models with one save die and you start rolling the next save. The issue people are objecting to is where you have a unit with identical saves but the owning player insists on rolling one die at a time. For example, a tactical squad takes 15 lasgun (AP -) wounds and has to make 15 3+ armor saves.

Taffy17 wrote:
This is what I'd normally do with mixed saves, but thinking about it surely its advantageous.

EG. you have a 2+ save and four 3+ saves in a squad and take 6 wounds which, by positioning are taken on the 2+ save guy.

lets say you roll one at a time and get 5,4,3,2,2,1, you would only loose one guy cause he saved all the rolls before the 1 despite there being some 2's in there as well which a 3+ save would fail.

But if you roll them all at the same time there is no order they're rolled in and therefore would two 3+ save people die as well?

Not sure if that made sense... but meh

The rules are pretty clear. Under "Fast Dice", Page 37, it says to make saves before allocating wounds, and then allocate unsaved wounds starting with the closest enemy model. There is a highly detailed example:

For example, a unit of 17 Ork Boyz (Armor Save 6+) including an Ork Nob with 'eavy armor (Armour Save 4+) comes under attack from a unit of Imperial Guard [yeah, you got it, it says IMPERIAL GUARD, not astra blah blah ]. They suffer a total of 8 Wounds from the massed lasgun fire. Rather than allocate wounds one at a time, the Ork player sees there are 6 Orks with the same save at the front of the unit, before getting a different save for the Ork Nob. He picks up and rolls 6 saving throws, fails 4 of them, and removes the 4 nearest Orks. This leaves 2 wounds in the Wound pool and 2 Orks before getting to the Ork Nob. Therefore, he rolls the final 2 saves; he fails both and removes 2 more Orks.

Spite for those who look through my history for blackmail.

I rolled one at a time on my Paladins when I played them. In timed tournaments. Every game still finished with an hour to spare in 2.5 hour game rounds easy. The dude should only have like 30~40 models (determining on how it's played now). Usually Draigo tanking wounds slows things down with his different save values.

Never had an opponent complain because everything else was speed rolling.

Have you tried telling him how annoying it is?

That's the place to start. Tell him it's annoying and if he doesn't stop then say "It's really annoying... let me show you how annoying" then roll all your devourer shots.

If he still doesn't get it just tell him you aren't going to play against him while he plays like that because you have better things to do with your time.

Of course if he's having to roll 1 at a time because he's got mixed saves... too bad... thems the rules... you'll just be a dick if you unnecessarily roll your devourer shots 1 at a time when he has to roll 1 at a time in accordance with the rules.

In tournament play you can call him out for stalling which in most tournaments is illegal.

In casual play its not against the rules but if you don't like it then ask him to stop.

Never hit for slow play, placed well with my Draigowing at a big tourney and a few small ones. When your turn is about 5~10 minutes tops, there's no such thing as slow play.

Start rolling 90 shots one at time and we'll have an issue. My five armor saves? Not a problem.

Edit.. oops double post.

 TheKbob wrote:
My five armor saves? Not a problem.

Sure it's a problem. Why do you need to waste any time rolling the dice one at a time, or expect me to trust you that your one-at-a-time rolling isn't just an attempt to cheat? Just roll all of them at once like everyone else does.

The only time I do that is with special units. Like my Chapter master with gorgons chain and so forth

For example, a unit of 17 Ork Boyz (Armor Save 6+) including an Ork Nob with 'eavy armor (Armour Save 4+) comes under attack from a unit of Imperial Guard [yeah, you got it, it says IMPERIAL GUARD, not astra blah blah ]. They suffer a total of 8 Wounds from the massed lasgun fire. Rather than allocate wounds one at a time, the Ork player sees there are 6 Orks with the same save at the front of the unit, before getting a different save for the Ork Nob. He picks up and rolls 6 saving throws, fails 4 of them, and removes the 4 nearest Orks. This leaves 2 wounds in the Wound pool and 2 Orks before getting to the Ork Nob. Therefore, he rolls the final 2 saves; he fails both and removes 2 more Orks.

If this is in the rules, it's hilarious because they took away the option to give a nob 'eavy armor in the new dex

It's true that rolling individually does seem mote advantageous, but it really is the same statistical probability.

I had a game recently where I was trying to kill Necron character who had 1 wound left. I got 11 wounds on him and my opponent decided to roll them individually, and passed all of them. Even though in my mind I knew the probability was the same, I could shake the feeling that if he'd thrown them all together he would've failed one. I did say to him there was no need to roll them individually since there was only no mixed saves and he didn't do it again.


I did eventually kill the Necron character, for anyone that wanted to know.

D

I always want to roll 1 by 1 when one of my important models gets enough wounds on it to kill it.

Not because of cheating, because I take a different dice for every throw. Not because I believe I'll have a bigger chance at survival. It's just more fun that way. For example, if you have 5 wounds on a model with a 2+ save and 1 wound left, chances are pretty big he's going to die. If you chuck 5 dice to the table and see a 1, that's the end of it. But if you throw them one at a time, tension starts building up. Hit by hit, you check whether your armor holds or breaks. By the time you made 4 saves, you know the next roll is an all or nothing save.

Tension just gets a lot higher, which I think is fun.


Footnote: I always check with my opponent if he's ok with me doing it this way. A quick "fine with you if I throw em 1 at a time for suspense?".
If they tell me to chuck em and get over with it, I do just that.

DaPino wrote:
Footnote: I always check with my opponent is ok ith me doing this. A quick "fine with you if I throw em 1 at the time for suspense?".
If they tell me to chuck em and get over with it, I do just that.

That's another thing then. You can't really complain about it being annoying if they ask you first.

I mostly just find slow rolling annoying, I don't care if it's 30 large unit of Termagants or Horus on his last wound... just roll the damn things already I've had a few opponents slow roll for things like that, I just don't find it more entertaining in the slightest. If it's just a one off I won't bother saying anything, I'll just give them my best look of derision as they slow roll it

Rolling singles gives better control, multi dice rolled bump in to each other so it possible to roll those 1s. If you train enough you can limit the number of 1s rolled. Specialy if you train to roll in a box made for it. It will never be 100% chance to not a 1, but hell lot of better then rolling all dice at the same time.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
It's a superstition, and a common one, that if you throw a dozen dice at once, you'll see more ones because the chances are higher, but if you throw each single die, it's a one in six chance. Barely any chance, right? It's an incorrect superstition, but that's what some people think and likely the reason. You can always tell them to hurry up but some folks have their traditions and won't appreciate you stepping on them.

It's called the "Gambler's Fallacy".

Makumba wrote:
Rolling singles gives better control, multi dice rolled bump in to each other so it possible to roll those 1s. If you train enough you can limit the number of 1s rolled. Specialy if you train to roll in a box made for it. It will never be 100% chance to not a 1, but hell lot of better then rolling all dice at the same time.

And this is leading into cheating territory.

If you're rolling one at a time to reduce your chances of rolling 1s, then you're trying to gain an unfair advantage, particularly if a 1 is the only number you can fail on. Even in situations where you have to roll individually, or there's only one die to roll, you ought to roll it the same way you roll a handful of dice.

Technically there is a difference between rolling 1 at a time and rolling in sets.

For example, a common dice trick that makes 2 dice roll 4s or higher (with one of them nearly always being a 6) relies on the dice placed against each other to force a specific separation.

If it actually makes a difference then someone should do an experiment. From my personal experience its just annoying, unless its a make or break roll that wins games, then its alright.

 Paradigm wrote:
No, and the result is statistically the same as chucking them all at once.

It never seems like it though

 The Shadow wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
No, and the result is statistically the same as chucking them all at once.

It never seems like it though

That's true. I had an Inquisitor pass about 25 straight Terminator saves the other day, rolled one at a time for suspense, and had I rolled them all at once, the result would be far less satisfying.

Actually, it probably 'feels' different for just that reason; throw them all, and you instantly see how dead your guy is, whereas if you throw one at a time, it's more about how much he survives.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
It's a superstition, and a common one, that if you throw a dozen dice at once, you'll see more ones because the chances are higher, but if you throw each single die, it's a one in six chance. Barely any chance, right? It's an incorrect superstition, but that's what some people think and likely the reason. You can always tell them to hurry up but some folks have their traditions and won't appreciate you stepping on them.

It's called the "Gambler's Fallacy".

Its not a fallacy. If you train with the same dice thrown on the same type of back ground you will be able to get the rolls you want more offten or at least lower the chance of getting that one roll you don't want . It just takes a lot of time to learn, after that it is just muscle memory. When you roll multiple dice they bounce against each other and all control is lost.

And this is leading into cheating territory.

Are long runners from kenia cheating, because they come from a place in the world where since ancient times those who couldn't do long runs died and had no children? If someone trains and is skilled at something, it doesn't make her or him a cheater. If we went this way everything would be cheating, Know the table before game? cheating. Know how much damage your units do to meq or geq. cheating again.

Makumba wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
It's a superstition, and a common one, that if you throw a dozen dice at once, you'll see more ones because the chances are higher, but if you throw each single die, it's a one in six chance. Barely any chance, right? It's an incorrect superstition, but that's what some people think and likely the reason. You can always tell them to hurry up but some folks have their traditions and won't appreciate you stepping on them.

It's called the "Gambler's Fallacy".

Its not a fallacy. If you train with the same dice thrown on the same type of back ground you will be able to get the rolls you want more offten or at least lower the chance of getting that one roll you don't want . It just takes a lot of time to learn, after that it is just muscle memory. When you roll multiple dice they bounce against each other and all control is lost.

And this is leading into cheating territory.

Are long runners from kenia cheating, because they come from a place in the world where since ancient times those who couldn't do long runs died and had no children? If someone trains and is skilled at something, it doesn't make her or him a cheater. If we went this way everything would be cheating, Know the table before game? cheating. Know how much damage your units do to meq or geq. cheating again.

And if your opponent requests you do all your rolling with a dice tower, would you decline because you get an advantage rolling dice one at a time? Using dice in a game automatically implies an expectation of a random result. Yes, it is cheating if you try to make the result less random.

Makumba wrote:
Its not a fallacy. If you train with the same dice thrown on the same type of back ground you will be able to get the rolls you want more offten or at least lower the chance of getting that one roll you don't want . It just takes a lot of time to learn, after that it is just muscle memory. When you roll multiple dice they bounce against each other and all control is lost.

No, you just misunderstood. The gambler's fallacy is referring to the idea that honestly-rolled dice behave differently because of various superstitions about "luck" or "dice memory" or whatever. And none of these beliefs are true. The fact that it's easier to cheat when you roll dice one at a time has nothing to do with the gambler's fallacy.

Are long runners from kenia cheating, because they come from a place in the world where since ancient times those who couldn't do long runs died and had no children? If someone trains and is skilled at something, it doesn't make her or him a cheater. If we went this way everything would be cheating, Know the table before game? cheating. Know how much damage your units do to meq or geq. cheating again.

And there goes your credibility on anything related to balance or legality. If you think that cheating with your dice is acceptable then you have no right to complain about how unfair it is that people with more money can buy better units. Everyone with any common sense knows that rolling dice non-randomly or playing with loaded dice is cheating, even if GW assumed that such an obvious fact didn't need to be stated explicitly in the rules. This is nothing more than justifying WAAC behavior, and I have no idea how the people in your area tolerate it.