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, it states that the roll can never be 4+ and if the wound causes instant death, it is -1. The base roll is 5+. If you have a cyrptek and use the Decurion formation in a unit of warriors, the roll would be a 3+ base. So, it is 4+ because it can never be better than that. But if the wound is instant death, would it be at 4+ (3+, -1) or 5+ (4+ -1)

Just confused in the order and if you can stack it that way. Another way to look at it is 5+ base, -1 for instant death and then +2 for bomus, so still 4+.

You would apply all modifiers, then adjust as necessary. Leaving you with a final of 4+.

To be honest: The new Reanimation Protocol is really fethed up in its RAW.
The rule says: The required dice roll can never be improved to be better than 4+.
But Crypteks (and any rule I've seen so far) do not change the 'required roll', they add +1 to the roll you made!

Let's explain it:
Y = The number you need to roll to ignore the Wound.
X = The amount you rolled.

If X is equal or higher than Y, you ignore the wound.
But Y cannot be lower than 4!
That doesn't matter at all since all bonuses affect X, including the ID one.


As to your question:
X (your roll) + 1 (Cryptek) + 1 (Decurion) - 1 (Instant Death).
Y >= 5
That means you need to roll a 4 (4+1+1-1 = 5) in order to survive it.

Kangodo wrote:
To be honest: The new Reanimation Protocol is really fethed up in its RAW.
The rule says: The required dice roll can never be improved to be better than 4+.
But Crypteks (and any rule I've seen so far) do not change the 'required roll', they add +1 to the roll you made!

Let's explain it:
Y = The number you need to roll to ignore the Wound.
X = The amount you rolled.

If X is equal or higher than Y, you ignore the wound.
But Y cannot be lower than 4!
That doesn't matter at all since all bonuses affect X, including the ID one.


As to your question:
X (your roll) + 1 (Cryptek) + 1 (Decurion) - 1 (Instant Death).
Y >= 5
That means you need to roll a 4 (4+1+1-1 = 5) in order to survive it.

Agreed. As written, it's a little bizarre.

Combining Technomancer and Ever-Living effectively gives a 3+ RP required roll. The RP is still 5+, you just add +2 to every die you roll. Good rules writing, GW.

Yeah, but I am glad for this mistake!
Because there is exactly one scenario where I would actually claim this stupid mistake: High Court of Damnos - the Undying.
That model used to have a RP2+ and a rerollable 3++ and is now reduced to 3+/4++ and a rerollabe RP of "4+"

Yeah love the RaW 2+ RP rolls (Decurion, 2 Crypteks) the same rules interaction in 6th enabled an Overlord to have an armour save he passed on a 1 . RaW stupidity aside you'd apply all modifiers then apply the limit of 4+ as Happyjew states.

no. cannot be improved to be better than a 4+. Techromancer gives a +1 bonus. So if you have ever living and your RP roll is a
4+ to start having a cryptek will not drop it to 3+ since It can never go below 4+. So a ID RP check is a 5+.

It already is awesome why the confusion. Its not plus one to the dice roll. Lordy READ the rules.

Page 68 "...his unit receive a +1 bonus to Reanimation Protocols rolls."

So it effects the RP roll. How does that work BrB page 11 "Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll to get the final result. For example, d6+2 means roll a dice and add 2 to the number on the dice for a total between 3 and 8."

So a unit containing 2 Crypteks in a Decurion rolls a d6+3 for its RP rolls. Giving a number between 4 and 9. I still need a 5 to pass so haven't broken the 4+ rule. However the physical dice only needs to show a 2 to succeed.

This is RaW.
Lordy READ the rules.

Because we all know it's conflicting, my gaming group will not allow our necron player to play that way. 4+ or worse only for him period. He is kinda QQ ing about it but oh well. He can quit if he hates it that bad.

I really doubt he is QQ'ing that he can't get a RP3+ on his army.
The RP is buffed and the intent is quite clear, despite GW's messed up wording.

It could actually be even worse... (not that I'd ever do this or allow this)

attach 4 crypteks to that Decurion unit, or 5 crypteks to a unit in an unbound army, and you'd be immune to all damage that isn't "Destroyer" or "remove from play"

Since there are no automatic pass or fail rules that apply to RP, the worst you could roll, even with a 1 on the dice against a wound causing ID would be a 5. (D6+5-1 is a range of 5 to 10, which will always pass)

On the other hand, the Overlord of a Reclamation Legion in a Decurion would never be able to roll a 1 on his RP roll, and thus would never be able to reroll it.

Kangodo, thanks for getting the battlescribe files up so fast!

Kangodo and FlingitNow, I agree with your interpretation RAW, but I think we all know how GW will rule it if they ever FAQ anything. Besides, we know how the tourney's will rule it too.
FAQ Rule #1, don't further break the game.

thanks for the discussion. I guess I just confirm with TO's when it comes up. But as I reading the rules again, I notice the RP can be made against any unsaved wound. Now, I don't have the old dex in front of me, but this is a big change right? Or was I playing it wrong before. That makes the formation with Wariths getting RP even more badass. a 3++ multi wound creature that has a 4+ RP on top of it!!!! crazy as good

So what specifically other than the Cryptek buff our RP to 4+? I'm seeing re-roll 1's but not a lot of add +1 to RP

The Decurion Detachment gives +1 to all RP.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Kangodo, thanks for getting the battlescribe files up so fast!

Kangodo and FlingitNow, I agree with your interpretation RAW, but I think we all know how GW will rule it if they ever FAQ anything. Besides, we know how the tourney's will rule it too.
FAQ Rule #1, don't further break the game.

Me and Kangodo do know exactly how the rule works and what is the RaI. In fact this is one of those situations that proves the RaW fundamentalists wrong with their constant bleeting of "RaI is never knowable". Of course anything above +1 on RP is wasted against any non-ID weapons and anything above +2 is entirely useless.

Fling and Kangodo, just to be clear.

Are the +1 RP modifiers to the RP roll?

They say they are +1 modifiers to the RP roll. See my quotes above.

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Kangodo, thanks for getting the battlescribe files up so fast!

Kangodo and FlingitNow, I agree with your interpretation RAW, but I think we all know how GW will rule it if they ever FAQ anything. Besides, we know how the tourney's will rule it too.
FAQ Rule #1, don't further break the game.

Me and Kangodo do know exactly how the rule works and what is the RaI. In fact this is one of those situations that proves the RaW fundamentalists wrong with their constant bleeting of "RaI is never knowable". Of course anything above +1 on RP is wasted against any non-ID weapons and anything above +2 is entirely useless.

That's a pretty bold claim to make.

DaPino wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Kangodo, thanks for getting the battlescribe files up so fast!

Kangodo and FlingitNow, I agree with your interpretation RAW, but I think we all know how GW will rule it if they ever FAQ anything. Besides, we know how the tourney's will rule it too.
FAQ Rule #1, don't further break the game.

Me and Kangodo do know exactly how the rule works and what is the RaI. In fact this is one of those situations that proves the RaW fundamentalists wrong with their constant bleeting of "RaI is never knowable". Of course anything above +1 on RP is wasted against any non-ID weapons and anything above +2 is entirely useless.

That's a pretty bold claim to make.

What is at all bold about it?

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Kangodo, thanks for getting the battlescribe files up so fast!

Kangodo and FlingitNow, I agree with your interpretation RAW, but I think we all know how GW will rule it if they ever FAQ anything. Besides, we know how the tourney's will rule it too.
FAQ Rule #1, don't further break the game.

Me and Kangodo do know exactly how the rule works and what is the RaI. In fact this is one of those situations that proves the RaW fundamentalists wrong with their constant bleeting of "RaI is never knowable". Of course anything above +1 on RP is wasted against any non-ID weapons and anything above +2 is entirely useless.

True, I misunderstood the purpose of your argument. Let's hope that common sense prevails, and 5+1+1-1=+4.

Kangodo wrote:
Yeah, but I am glad for this mistake!
Because there is exactly one scenario where I would actually claim this stupid mistake: High Court of Damnos - the Undying.
That model used to have a RP2+ and a rerollable 3++ and is now reduced to 3+/4++ and a rerollabe RP of "4+"

This isn't actually a problem. The High Court of Damnos is no longer playable. There is no longer any Harbingers of Transmogrification to represent Ankh.

Well, making my favourite formation unplayable is something I would call a problem

Kangodo wrote:
Well, making my favourite formation unplayable is something I would call a problem

Ok, it's a different problem

So, does wounds disregarded by the Reanimation Protocol still count when deciding who wins an assault round? Since the RP roll triggers by "unsaved wounds"? Or are they disregarded for this purpose also?

Works the same as FNP?

Same as FNP.

If the entire squad is killed no resnimation is granted correct? I know that's how it use to be. Our necron player is saying it changed.

You roll RP per wound, just like FNP.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If the entire squad is killed no resnimation is granted correct? I know that's how it use to be. Our necron player is saying it changed.

It did change. That rule is gone and it wouldn't be applicable anymore anyhow. The new Reanimaiton Protocol works "kind of" like FNP, in other words the models don't die until they actually failed their Reanimation roll.

If they fail the normal armour/cover/inv-save, they roll RP and if they pass they simply don't get a wound anyway. So in other words you can't kill the squad unless they already failed their RP rolls.

But if you actually DO kill a squad of necrons you don't have to worry about them coming back again =)

Thank you for the detailed answer, exalted!