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 if you have a gun that kills you on a roll of a 1, and you have negative modifiers to hit for some reason (moving heavy, firing at something hard to hit etc.) do you die on a dice roll of a 2, which is modified down to a 1?

And I guess similarly, quite a lot of abilities let you reroll 1s. Might that save you in this situation?

I note that these abilities happen only on the roll of a 1, not on a 1 or less. It doesn't make a lot of sense to have a plasma cannon kill you on a dice roll of a 2, but not a 1 (which would become a 0). But then it also doesn't make sense for it to be more likely to explode when you fire it at a plane.

Am I missing a rule somewhere? I've had a good look but it's easy to miss stuff.

Roll of 1 is not the same as result of 1.

Roll of 1 is a natural roll of 1.

I saw actually that a playtester (Reece from ITC) said yes, and if you're both firing at something that is hard to hit AND after you moved (IE giving you a -2 to hit total), you overheat and die on a roll of a 1, 2 or 3.

Wait Seriously?

so if there was a case where you would add +1 to your hit rolls, do you overwatch on a 5+?

I guess. I'm having a hard time finding that picture someone linked now.

 Desubot wrote:
Wait Seriously?

so if there was a case where you would add +1 to your hit rolls, do you overwatch on a 5+?

No, because Overwatch says "... irrespective of the firing model's Ballistic Skill or any modifiers."

 Ghaz wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Wait Seriously?

so if there was a case where you would add +1 to your hit rolls, do you overwatch on a 5+?

No, because Overwatch says "... irrespective of the firing model's Ballistic Skill or any modifiers."

Ah Thanks. at least that one is clarified.

Here: https://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/882175-.html

Saw it in this thread: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727410.page#9413692

But grain of salt, I suppose. It's not a GW answer and everyone is fallible.

 KiloFiX wrote:
Roll of 1 is not the same as result of 1.

Roll of 1 is a natural roll of 1.

I think you're right, but I'd love to see it written down clearly.

I've only ever seen references to "rolls", not "results". So for instance a railgun does extra mortal wounds on a "roll" of a 6+, not a "result" of a 6+.

Jacksmiles wrote:
I saw actually that a playtester (Reece from ITC) said yes, and if you're both firing at something that is hard to hit AND after you moved (IE giving you a -2 to hit total), you overheat and die on a roll of a 1, 2 or 3.

He also said that if you have a +1 modifier you still overheat on a roll of 1 (but you miss the target), so his answers weren't consistent.

 doctortom wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:
I saw actually that a playtester (Reece from ITC) said yes, and if you're both firing at something that is hard to hit AND after you moved (IE giving you a -2 to hit total), you overheat and die on a roll of a 1, 2 or 3.

He also said that if you have a +1 modifier you still overheat on a roll of 1 (but you miss the target), so his answers weren't consistent.

I totally understand if you don't, but do you have a picture of that? I just want to see the inconsistency for myself for curiosity's sake, and because it's weird that he would say that but in the very first statement on the one I linked, he says the opposite (that you miss but don't overheat). Were the statements on different days or something?

I just mean it's strange for someone (outside of GW *wink wink*) to say "yes" then "no" to the same question.

Jacksmiles wrote:
I totally understand if you don't, but do you have a picture of that? I just want to see the inconsistency for myself for curiosity's sake, and because it's weird that he would say that but in the very first statement on the one I linked, he says the opposite (that you miss but don't overheat). Were the statements on different days or something?

I just mean it's strange for someone (outside of GW *wink wink*) to say "yes" then "no" to the same question.

Reece is under a ton of pressure getting questions from everyone as he's become kind of a 3rd party representative for GW through his faction focus articles and of course his live preview stream of the rules. That doesn't mean that he necessarily has the inside track about each and every rules question, nor does it mean he can't make mistakes, forget stuff, etc.

Back when GW had me personally thanked on their FAQs, people would email and PM me all the time asking me rules questions, as though I had some kind of authority or pipeline to the studio from which I could dispense information, which of course was not the case. And even when I did manage to get some inside information provided to me by a rules writer, it happened to me twice where things they told me privately ended up being rules the opposite once the official FAQs were released (so either the writer who answered me wasn't involved with the FAQ process or they simply changed their minds after thinking about it later).

Long story shot, I'd be wary of Reece's answer in that screenshot until you hear something official from GW because it doesn't even internally make sense. He says that positive modifiers can take the result of a roll up beyond a 6 (which makes sense), but there's also nothing stating that the result of a roll can't go below '1' either. So if that's how the rules work (that you apply modifiers first before seeing what the result of the 'roll' is) then if you have a '-1' modifier on your 'to hit' rolls, then a roll of '1' on the dice wouldn't slay the model, as it would actually count as a result of '0'.

Jacksmiles wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:
I saw actually that a playtester (Reece from ITC) said yes, and if you're both firing at something that is hard to hit AND after you moved (IE giving you a -2 to hit total), you overheat and die on a roll of a 1, 2 or 3.

He also said that if you have a +1 modifier you still overheat on a roll of 1 (but you miss the target), so his answers weren't consistent.

I totally understand if you don't, but do you have a picture of that? I just want to see the inconsistency for myself for curiosity's sake, and because it's weird that he would say that but in the very first statement on the one I linked, he says the opposite (that you miss but don't overheat). Were the statements on different days or something?

I just mean it's strange for someone (outside of GW *wink wink*) to say "yes" then "no" to the same question.

Somebody had posted the picture of it in a different thread about modifiers (possibly modifiers and rerolls).

Fair enough. Like I said, it all needs to be taken with salt anyway, I was just reporting what I had seen.

@yakface - Agreed. Also like I said in the first post, everyone is fallible, so I look forward to hearing an official answer!

Another place this same sort of issue pops up is in the Kastelan Robot rules:

Repulsor Grid gives a 5++ save and "anytime you roll a 6+ for the repulsor grid's saving throw, the unit that made the attack suffers a mortal wound".

The next rule gives the possibility for the Aegis protocol buff which provides "You can add 1 to any armor and invulnerable saving throws you make for models in this unit."

Which then would then dish out a reflected mortal wound on a 5+ saving throw? That's nuts.

steerpike92 wrote:
Another place this same sort of issue pops up is in the Kastelan Robot rules:

Repulsor Grid gives a 5++ save and "anytime you roll a 6+ for the repulsor grid's saving throw, the unit that made the attack suffers a mortal wound".

maybe if you roll a 6 it counts now as a 7 for balance? is it a roll of a 6 or a 6+ ?

peirceg wrote:

steerpike92 wrote:
Another place this same sort of issue pops up is in the Kastelan Robot rules:

Repulsor Grid gives a 5++ save and "anytime you roll a 6+ for the repulsor grid's saving throw, the unit that made the attack suffers a mortal wound".

maybe if you roll a 6 it counts now as a 7 for balance? is it a roll of a 6 or a 6+ ?

It says a roll of 6+.

It's sort of a sequencing problem, which should give the discretion to the shooter, but that doesn't really work because a rule that buffs an invulnerable save can't really be invoked after the rule that gives the invulnerable save is resolved.

That or GW really needs to iron out the semantic difference between a "result" and a "roll." Results should be modifiable while rolls should only be subject to re-roll. Otherwise we get D6 rolls of -1, 0, and 7 ect which the rules don't seem to anticipate.

Mandragola wrote:
So if you have a gun that kills you on a roll of a 1, and you have negative modifiers to hit for some reason (moving heavy, firing at something hard to hit etc.) do you die on a dice roll of a 2, which is modified down to a 1?

And I guess similarly, quite a lot of abilities let you reroll 1s. Might that save you in this situation?

I note that these abilities happen only on the roll of a 1, not on a 1 or less. It doesn't make a lot of sense to have a plasma cannon kill you on a dice roll of a 2, but not a 1 (which would become a 0). But then it also doesn't make sense for it to be more likely to explode when you fire it at a plane.

Am I missing a rule somewhere? I've had a good look but it's easy to miss stuff.

You cannot roll under a 1 as 1s always fail and so would any roll less then 1.

As for Heavy Plasmas, yes if you move and shoot you can lose your model on a 1 or a 2. The end result of the roll is considered after modifiers, which are applied after any re-rolls. Keep in mind that it works in other ways as well. If you have an effect that goes off on a 6+ but there's a modifier that puts a -1 on the roll you can never actually roll a 6 with out a buff from some other source. It works the other way around as well. Using the Kastelan Robot again as an example, if you can add a +1 to the Invul save then the Repulsor Grid would activate on a dice roll of a 5 or 6 because you actually rolled a 6 or 7.

This is a very common thing in AoS fyi.

Natural roll of 1, which is re-rollable with my Long Fangs

BomBomHotdog wrote:


You cannot roll under a 1 as 1s always fail and so would any roll less then 1.

As for Heavy Plasmas, yes if you move and shoot you can lose your model on a 1 or a 2. The end result of the roll is considered after modifiers, which are applied after any re-rolls. Keep in mind that it works in other ways as well. If you have an effect that goes off on a 6+ but there's a modifier that puts a -1 on the roll you can never actually roll a 6 with out a buff from some other source. It works the other way around as well. Using the Kastelan Robot again as an example, if you can add a +1 to the Invul save then the Repulsor Grid would activate on a dice roll of a 5 or 6 because you actually rolled a 6 or 7.

This is a very common thing in AoS fyi.

But the rules don't say that (you can't roll under a '1'. They say an umodified '1' always fails. But the actual result of the roll (which is what you're saying abilities key off of) would still be 0, -1, -2, etc. If we're saying that the modified results of 7,8,9, etc. work that way then there's nothing in the rules which stops it on the other side.

And if we truly are applying modifiers after re-rolls then when you have a BS of 4+ with a -1 modifier to hit then you don't get to re-roll '4's (because those would be a hit before modifiers are applied)?

That's nonsense. GW needs to fix their crap and explain how they want this stuff to work that's consistent and makes some sense.

I think that the rules are mostly pretty clear on this.

Rolls get modified before you apply tests that look for the value or result or whatever of the roll. I don't see that there's any reason to think the rules make a distinction between terms like "roll", "result", etc. The rules are very careful to say that certain tests are applied irrespective of modifiers.

The rules clearly intend it to be the case that rolls can be modified beyond 6 -- several units (for example, many Dark Eldar units) have "7+" saves, which seems like a way of giving units no save normally but the ability to benefit slightly from cover. If you check the Saving Throw rules the only way that a 7+ save model can make its save is if the result of a roll is at least 7. In light of that, I think it's very hard to argue that modifying a roll below 1 is impossible

The only really hard cases I've encountered, I think, are "re-roll fail" type abilities, where it is not clear how you determine whether a roll is a failure/miss before applying modifiers, since re-rolls happen before modifiers. Nothing tells you to do the actual evaluation of a test early, and so it's weird to say "well, this die hasn't missed, and it won't miss, yet nevertheless it is a miss". Pending a FAQ, I had intended to play this as reasoning ahead to determine whether the roll really would succeed or fail.

Dionysodorus wrote:
I think that the rules are mostly pretty clear on this.

Rolls get modified before you apply tests that look for the value or result or whatever of the roll. I don't see that there's any reason to think the rules make a distinction between terms like "roll", "result", etc. The rules are very careful to say that certain tests are applied irrespective of modifiers.

The rules clearly intend it to be the case that rolls can be modified beyond 6 -- several units (for example, many Dark Eldar units) have "7+" saves, which seems like a way of giving units no save normally but the ability to benefit slightly from cover. If you check the Saving Throw rules the only way that a 7+ save model can make its save is if the result of a roll is at least 7. In light of that, I think it's very hard to argue that modifying a roll below 1 is impossible

The only really hard cases I've encountered, I think, are "re-roll fail" type abilities, where it is not clear how you determine whether a roll is a failure/miss before applying modifiers, since re-rolls happen before modifiers. Pending a FAQ, I had intended to play this as reasoning ahead to determine whether the roll really would succeed or fail.

The problem with using a blanket statement to say that modifiers are applied before triggering abilities is it makes things an absolute mess for abilities that trigger off a specific result rolled, like '1's or '2's, for example. Going by that way of thinking, if something triggers off a roll of '1' and you have a -1 modifier to the roll then all of a sudden you're not actually triggering off rolls of '1', but instead off of '2's (which are now modified down to '1's, with the '1's being modified down to '0). Its just utterly ridiculous. Nobody instinctively plays that way and if GW rules for us to play that way it would be bonkers (IMHO).

The way this needs to be FAQ'd to make it play like everyone already thinks it does, doesn't actually take much work:

1) If an ability allows re-rolls of a success or failure (such as hits/misses wounds/failed wounds) then these re-rolls occur after all modifiers have been applied.
2) If an ability triggers off of a specific value with a '+' sign after it (such as 4+, 5+, etc.) then this value is checked only after all modifiers have been applied.
3) If an ability triggers off a specific roll value (such as '1', '2', etc.) then this value is checked before any modifiers are applied.

Huh, it just didn't strike me as weird to have something that triggers only on 1s instead trigger on natural 2s or on (impossible) natural 0s. FWIW that's exactly how I would have played it after reading the rules, and before threads like this I'd have been surprised if someone objected. So, yes, it could certainly use a FAQ.

Other than re-rolls, which happen before modifiers explicitly, what all is there that triggers on specific values that appear to be modifiable? Plasma overheating is the only thing that comes to mind. I had thought that the Shadowfield rules might do this, but those actually just say that the field only shorts out if the save is failed.

Dionysodorus wrote:
Huh, it just didn't strike me as weird to have something that triggers only on 1s instead trigger on natural 2s or on (impossible) natural 0s. FWIW that's exactly how I would have played it after reading the rules, and before threads like this I'd have been surprised if someone objected. So, yes, it could certainly use a FAQ.

Other than re-rolls, which happen before modifiers explicitly, what all is there that triggers on specific values that appear to be modifiable? Plasma overheating is the only thing that comes to mind. I had thought that the Shadowfield rules might do this, but those actually just say that the field only shorts out if the save is failed.

Not having gone through every ability with a fine tooth comb yet, that might be the only thing currently, because everything else that uses a specific roll value I can think of is re-roll based (re-roll '1's, re-roll '2's, etc.) and those are obviously covered by the 're-rolls happen before modifiers' rule. But in fact, I believe that the rule about re-rolls having to be done before modifiers was included to protect those types of abilities from being crazy to resolve (actually having to re-roll '2's instead of '1's if you had a -1 modifier to the roll), which in turn is what now 'breaks' re-roll abilities that trigger off a success/failure.

Not to mention that they totally could end up including more abilities in the future that trigger on specific values, which obviously will suffer from the same issue of being non-intuitive (IMHO) if modifiers get applied ahead of resolving them.

This does need an FAQ. Reading this thread, it's clear that there are multiple interpretations of what the RAI might be. I honestly think all the different interpretations could be argued to make sense, but none of them seems certain to be right, so we need a ruling.

I think the 6+ thing is much less problematic, because they give us a "+". So it's clearly happy to deal with a result of a 7 or more, and even explicitly expects it in the case of lightly-armoured stuff. I'm not sure I even see a problem with the Kastellan robots - it seems clear that you do get a mortal wound on a dice roll of a 5 or 6 if they are using Aegis protocols.

On 1s the questions are:

- if I have -1 to hit do I die on a dice roll of a 1, a 2, or a 1 or 2?
- If I have +1 to hit does that make me immune to my gun exploding?
- What happens in both of the above scenarios if I can reroll 1s to hit?

So, I think we can garner some intent from AOS, which was the test bed for modifiers, and from which many rules are directly copied.

Q: Several abilities trigger when you roll a 6 or more – will a
positive or negative modifier from a spell or ability affect this?

A: Yes. A 6 with a -1 modifier would become a 5,
for example.

So, applying the AOS FAQ, moving with overcharged plasma cannons, your rolls of a 1, would be modified to a 0, and your rolls of a 2 would be modified to a 1. You would die on a natural 2. In the other direction, having a +1 to hit, would mean that the lowest you can roll is a 2, which means you would never die. This comes from this portion of the FAQ.

Q: Is it possible for modifiers to make a hit, wound or save roll
automatically successful? For example, a save roll of 3 or more
with a +2 modifier.

A: Yes. In this example, the save would be
made automatically.

So, they say that a roll of a 1 with a + 2 modifier becomes a 3. Ergo, a roll of a 1 with a +1 modifier would be a 2.

Finally:

Q: What happens if two abilities affect the same dice roll? For
example, if Screamers of Tzeentch – which near any Daemon
Heroes of Tzeentch treat all enemy hit rolls of 6 as hit rolls
of 1 – were hit by a unit for which a hit roll of 6 produces a
mortal wound.

A: Always use abilities that modify dice rolls before
applying any abilities that are triggered by the
(modified) dice roll in question. For example, a
Retributor affected by an enemy ability that applied a -1
modifier to the Retributor’s hit rolls would have to apply
the modifier before seeing whether it was able to use its
Blast to Ashes ability. If there is still a conflict, the player
whose turn is taking place applies their abilities first –
see ‘When to Use Abilities’ in the Hints & Tips section
for warscrolls.

So again, effects and abilities trigger after modifiers. You would modify the 1 to a 2 before the Supercharge ability triggered and killed your guy, and then it would not have triggered because you rolled a 2.

Finally, on the subject of re-rolls are applied before modifiers. An ability that allows you to re-roll 1s will always re-roll natural 1s before any modifiers.

There is some thematic wonkiness here. I can kind of understand a plasma cannon being more likely to explode if you move, since moving a heavy piece of equipment might make you more likely to make a mistake, but them being more likely to explode when aimed at fast flying things is weird. Thematically, I hope it doesn't work that way. Mechanically, it's kind of vague.

gnofry wrote:
So, I think we can garner some intent from AOS, which was the test bed for modifiers, and from which many rules are directly copied.

Q: Several abilities trigger when you roll a 6 or more – will a
positive or negative modifier from a spell or ability affect this?

A: Yes. A 6 with a -1 modifier would become a 5,
for example.

So, applying the AOS FAQ, moving with overcharged plasma cannons, your rolls of a 1, would be modified to a 0, and your rolls of a 2 would be modified to a 1. You would die on a natural 2. In the other direction, having a +1 to hit, would mean that the lowest you can roll is a 2, which means you would never die. This comes from this portion of the FAQ.

But that specific question is actually asking about an ability that triggers on (to use the 40k nomenclature) a '6+', something I think everyone can recognize has to be checked after modifiers are applied, especially because there are 7+ abilities out there.

Q: Is it possible for modifiers to make a hit, wound or save roll
automatically successful? For example, a save roll of 3 or more
with a +2 modifier.

A: Yes. In this example, the save would be
made automatically.

So, they say that a roll of a 1 with a + 2 modifier becomes a 3. Ergo, a roll of a 1 with a +1 modifier would be a 2.

And yet in 40k, we have clear rules that specify that rolls fail on a '1', regardless of modifiers. So they've clearly changed their minds since then.

Finally:

Q: What happens if two abilities affect the same dice roll? For
example, if Screamers of Tzeentch – which near any Daemon
Heroes of Tzeentch treat all enemy hit rolls of 6 as hit rolls
of 1 – were hit by a unit for which a hit roll of 6 produces a
mortal wound.

A: Always use abilities that modify dice rolls before
applying any abilities that are triggered by the
(modified) dice roll in question. For example, a
Retributor affected by an enemy ability that applied a -1
modifier to the Retributor’s hit rolls would have to apply
the modifier before seeing whether it was able to use its
Blast to Ashes ability. If there is still a conflict, the player
whose turn is taking place applies their abilities first –
see ‘When to Use Abilities’ in the Hints & Tips section
for warscrolls.

So again, effects and abilities trigger after modifiers. You would modify the 1 to a 2 before the Supercharge ability triggered and killed your guy, and then it would not have triggered because you rolled a 2.

Obviously the RAW lean towards applying modifiers before checking to see if abilities are triggered, but in the case of something triggering off the roll of a '1', the obvious goal of that rule is to have the worst roll possible (a '1') cause something bad to happen to you. Having modifiers apply in this particular case creates a strange situation that will not make sense to the majority of players (that a '2' is worse than a '1' for some reason), and as such I cannot imagine they will possibly rule that way. Its either going to end up being that if the roll has a '-1' modifier then a roll of '1' AND '2' slay the firing model, or they're going to say in this particular case, to ignore modifiers. None of the AoS FAQ examples you've quoted is a close enough equivalent to really tell us anything.

Finally, on the subject of re-rolls are applied before modifiers. An ability that allows you to re-roll 1s will always re-roll natural 1s before any modifiers.

And that's because the rules properly cover that situation. But what I'm saying is that if the rules ever ask for an effect to trigger on a specific rolled result (which currently is only on a '1' that I know of), the natural inclination for players reading that rule is to think it applies to the natural roll, not the modified result.