Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 12:09:13
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
So the rules say: "..., and re-rolls happen before modifiers (if any) are applied."
Sure, this works fine for rules that grant re-rolls on certain dice scores: If you get to re-roll 1s, you only re-roll dice that roll natural 1s, even when a +1 will make that a 2, or when a -2 makes your rolls of 1 through 3 count as 1s. So great.
But there are rules that trigger re-rolls based on the *result* of the roll, typically failed hit or wound rolls. The result is dependent on the modifiers: a model with BS 4+ will hit on a roll of 4, but will miss if there is a negative modifier to the roll.
I see a lot of players adopting that the roll of a 4 is "a hit", so no re-roll applies, but then they apply modifiers and it's a miss. But seriously WTF! If it's a hit, I want to see a wound roll. If it's a miss, I want my re-roll. This wierd Schrödinger "hit, but really a miss" gak smells [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - ALPHARIUS].
-T10
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 18:32:32
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 12:13:43
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
You determine the hit or miss before modifiers.
I really hate it.
|
DFTT |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 13:10:01
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
Is this faq'ed, or is it based on interpeting only the blurb about re-rolls in the rules? It's very counter-intuitive.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 13:11:06
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Powerful Phoenix Lord
|
It's been FAQ'ed...to state it's exactly as stated in the rulebook.
Personally, I think it's a rather poor design decision and results in some very bad rules conflicts/situations.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 13:19:25
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Swift Swooping Hawk
|
T10 wrote:This wierd Schrödinger "hit, but really a miss" gak smells [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - ALPHARIUS].
It may be counterintuitive, but at least it works. That's more than can be said for many other rules in this game.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 18:33:27
Craftworld Sciatháin 4180 pts |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 13:27:57
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Three Color Minimum
|
Determine first of it is a 'must' reroll or a 'may' reroll. If modifiers will get the result you want and it is affected by a 'may' reroll then ignore it.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 13:44:18
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
It’s counter-intuitive and seems wonky but I guess in an edition of buff auras it somewhat curtails the potentially OP nature of them a bit. Before modifiers leads to lots of weird stuff like a Dev sergeant making sure his favorite friend’s plasma never overheats, or how plasma overheats twice as frequently at night.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 14:13:59
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
I agree it's very counter intuitive, and takes getting used to. Hiwever, as per the previous post commented, if you didn't do it this way, it makes modifiers proportionately more effective. Suddenly all those +1s and -1s become too effective. And any cumulative modifiers to +/- 2 or more become way too powerful.
It's a necessary control to keep modifiers in check.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 14:30:24
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
I like it, i like the fact that it is written "when" these things happens, that is good and not confusing at all. Its just something new we need to get used to.
This is how i see it and this might help you.
Your SM with a 3+ to hit will ALWAYS be a 3+ to hit, his skill will always remain the same, he is a good shooter, he is trained, but that vehicle is "hard to hit" it might be b.c its moving fast and dodging, or its a Harlequin and has a Mirage copy of it and the SM simply shot at the Mirage... albeit he still hit it, sadly it was a fake.
You see, the models are still hitting with the good aim, its just that unit manage to get away from the shot.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 15:25:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 15:17:19
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Abel
|
It's counter intuitive because you have been playing that way for a long time.
Treat this edition as an entirely new game. Throw away your preconceived notions of how the game used to be played and how it should be played. This is a new game.
|
Kara Sloan shoots through Time and Design Space for a Negative Play Experience |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 15:21:15
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
Manchester, UK
|
It's weird but those are the rules. It is not something that you can just house rule away without it drastically affecting the maths of the game. I personally think it is weird and unintuitive but it just needs to be learned I guess.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 15:34:10
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
I'm looking at what appears to be the latest rulebook FAQ: https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/40K_8th_ed_Update_Rulebook_ver_1.1.pdf
It does not seem to address the issue of re-rolling failed rolls. Neither the basic rules or the FAQ suggests that you need to look at your dice and say: "That roll is going to be a miss once I apply modifiers, but first I have t be careful and treat it as a hit for the purpose of re-rolls." That's a kind of nonsense game mechanic that is invented for the purpose of shoe-horning the "modifiers after re-rolls" rule into the situation.
When the a unit's rules say "re-roll misses", you re-roll the dice that result in misses: All units rules are exceptions to the normal rules!
-T10
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 15:40:07
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Swift Swooping Hawk
|
T10 wrote:I'm looking at what appears to be the latest rulebook FAQ: https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/40K_8th_ed_Update_Rulebook_ver_1.1.pdf
It does not seem to address the issue of re-rolling failed rolls. Neither the basic rules or the FAQ suggests that you need to look at your dice and say: "That roll is going to be a miss once I apply modifiers, but first I have t be careful and treat it as a hit for the purpose of re-rolls." That's a kind of nonsense game mechanic that is invented for the purpose of shoe-horning the "modifiers after re-rolls" rule into the situation.
When the a unit's rules say "re-roll misses", you re-roll the dice that result in misses: All units rules are exceptions to the normal rules!
-T10
Are you seriously arguing that we shouldn't follow the rules because you personally disagree with how they work? If that's something you and your opponent both agree to house rule, that's fine as long as it's just between the two of you, but you're not going to change the RAW.
|
Craftworld Sciatháin 4180 pts |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 15:41:21
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Witch Hunter in the Shadows
Aachen
|
Plasmaguns shouldn't be less reliable at night, aimed at a very stealthy enemy. Shooting at e.g. Raven Guard at night means your plasmagun explodes 50% of the time, and you can't reroll 2 out of 3 1's because they only turn into 1's after re-roll abilities checked the dice result.
Throwing glitter on a pile of horse dung doesn't magically turn it into something nice.
But yes, the intent of the rule is clear. It's like that crap with being unable to jink when a blast scatters onto another unit - it makes no sense, it's stupid and it's the rule.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 15:49:38
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Plasmas should have only exploded on natural ones
Just like how Kastalan robots were changed in the codex to have their bounce shield work only on a natural 6
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 16:21:26
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
Cream Tea wrote:
Are you seriously arguing that we shouldn't follow the rules because you personally disagree with how they work? If that's something you and your opponent both agree to house rule, that's fine as long as it's just between the two of you, but you're not going to change the RAW.
No, I'm arguing that what people have adopted isn't actually a rule.
Yes, the rules say re-rolls happen before modifiers. And that works fine for rules that trigger re-rolls on certain dice rolls.
But you have to apply the modifiers to determine whether a roll is a hit or a miss. And if a rule allows you to re-roll the dice based on that final result, it doesn't break the rules: It is an exception to the normal rules for re-rolls.
Edit: One of these is a rule, the other is made up:
1. Litanies of Hate: You can re-roll failed hit rolls in the Fight phase for friendly <chapter> units within 6" of this model.
2. Litanies of Hate: You can re-roll hit rolls that will become failed hit rolls, except those rolls that would have been hits before modifiers are applied, in the Fight phase for friendly <chapter> units within 6" of this model.
-T10
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 16:26:30
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 16:26:21
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
nekooni wrote:
Plasmaguns shouldn't be less reliable at night, aimed at a very stealthy enemy. Shooting at e.g. Raven Guard at night means your plasmagun explodes 50% of the time, and you can't reroll 2 out of 3 1's because they only turn into 1's after re-roll abilities checked the dice result.
Throwing glitter on a pile of horse dung doesn't magically turn it into something nice.
But yes, the intent of the rule is clear. It's like that crap with being unable to jink when a blast scatters onto another unit - it makes no sense, it's stupid and it's the rule.
 your right, well think of it this way, he is holding the button down too long to get the shot off at night
Edit: My english is extra bad today
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/10/15 16:27:09
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 16:27:05
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Swift Swooping Hawk
|
T10 wrote:
No, I'm arguing that what people have adopted isn't actually a rule.
Yes, the rules say re-rolls happen before modifiers. And that works fine for rules that trigger re-rolls on certain dice rolls.
But you have to apply the modifiers to determine whether a roll is a hit or a miss. And if a rule allows you to re-roll the dice based on that final result, it doesn't break the rules: It is an exception to the normal rules for re-rolls.
-T10
In that case you'd sometimes apply modifiers before rerolling. and sometimes after. I don't see how that makes anything better (well, Guilliman &co get a buff), and the game would be more confusing and inconsistent.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 16:27:17
Craftworld Sciatháin 4180 pts |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 16:27:45
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Problem is that re-roll abilities also differ, creating potentially additional confusion.
E.g.
Guilliman can only re-roll "failed" hits, so he cannot re-roll "successful" hits that'll be failures post-modifier.
Cawl can re-roll any hits, including successes, so you're free to re-roll those "successes" you know will be misses post-modifier.
I get that the competitive crowd enjoys memorizing stuff like that, but it seems unnecessarily confusing for the target audience to have so many variants of slightly similar, but subtle different rules.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 16:28:57
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 16:30:37
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Cream Tea wrote:T10 wrote:
No, I'm arguing that what people have adopted isn't actually a rule.
Yes, the rules say re-rolls happen before modifiers. And that works fine for rules that trigger re-rolls on certain dice rolls.
But you have to apply the modifiers to determine whether a roll is a hit or a miss. And if a rule allows you to re-roll the dice based on that final result, it doesn't break the rules: It is an exception to the normal rules for re-rolls.
-T10
In that case you'd sometimes apply modifiers before rerolling. and sometimes after. I don't see how that makes anything better (well, Guilliman &co get a buff), and the game would be more confusing and inconsistent.
The way he was saying is wrong, Gman rules is in the to-hit part of the rules and before modifiers, you have to roll the ho-hits 1st (all of them) then move on. You are also suppose to do them 1 at a time.... but fast dice.
Edit: English hard.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 16:31:14
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 16:39:02
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
Cream Tea wrote:
In that case you'd sometimes apply modifiers before rerolling. and sometimes after. I don't see how that makes anything better (well, Guilliman &co get a buff), and the game would be more confusing and inconsistent.
.
Not really. The sequence becomes something like this:
1. Roll dice.
2. Exception rule, e.g. Rites of Battle: Determine if you are allowed to re-roll
3. Apply modifier.
4. Determine if roll is a hit or miss.
5: Exceptional rule, e.g. Litanies of Hate: Determine if you are allowed a re-roll.
Note: Neither of those rules used as examples allow you to re-roll a dice more than once.
So let's say you make six attacks at 3+ to hit with a -1 modifier, and you are subject to both the rules used in the example, and you roll one of each result, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.
You can immediately re-roll the 1 due to Rites of Battle.
Setting aside the re-rolled dice, you apply the modifiers and you end up with 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Three hits, two misses. Now you re-roll the two misses.
How is this not following the rules? A rule that lets you re-rolling after modifiers is as valid as a rule that lets you advance and fire non-assault weapons.
-T10
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 16:40:11
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 16:57:14
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
These rules aren't confusing.
They're not un-fluffy.
Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean you get to change them or ignore them. Deal with it - or play with your friends, and houserule everything.
Personally, I think the rule is actually a great thing - it allows plus/minus modifiers to exist, not be entirely overpowering.
And if it sounds unfluffy that your plasma exploded easier - I subscribe to the same thought process that @Amishprn86 and others do; you plasma gunner had to hold down the trigger more/fire more shots, because range/speed/special abilities of the enemy caused him to miss more often - thus, his gun explodes easier because he needed to use more shots/gets caught up and doesn't notice the technology overheating/etc.
@Wonderwolf: Welcome to the world of GW, and gaming in general - people are notoriously inconsistent with wording and reading in general [which matters for gameplay]; plus, some units are allowed to have improved/inferior versions of the same ability.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 16:59:17
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Swift Swooping Hawk
|
T10 wrote:So the rules say: "..., and re-rolls happen before modifiers (if any) are applied."
If the intention was for the rules to work like you want them to, this text wouldn't exist, or it would have a caveat that you do it the other way round if the reroll cares about hit/miss rather than specific numbers.
You're proposing alternative rules, but you have no case that it works like that in the actual rules.
|
Craftworld Sciatháin 4180 pts |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 17:03:31
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
fe40k wrote:
@Wonderwolf: Welcome to the world of GW, and gaming in general - people are notoriously inconsistent with wording and reading in general [which matters for gameplay]; plus, some units are allowed to have improved/inferior versions of the same ability.
Just because it's allowed, doesn't mean it isn't bad game design (for the very reason you noted in the first half of that sentence). This much differentiation means the game prioritizes memorization over rules application, a "game" that's "hard" to learn (as in memorize all the codices) and easy to master (a breeze, if you memorized the stuff and identified the mathematical advantage) as opposed to being easy to learn (as few rules as possible) and hard to master (application of identical rules on all sides, as opposed to rules-advantages on one side due to rules-variations).
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 17:08:45
Subject: Re:Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Wonderwolf wrote:Problem is that re-roll abilities also differ, creating potentially additional confusion.
E.g.
Guilliman can only re-roll "failed" hits, so he cannot re-roll "successful" hits that'll be failures post-modifier.
Cawl can re-roll any hits, including successes, so you're free to re-roll those "successes" you know will be misses post-modifier.
I get that the competitive crowd enjoys memorizing stuff like that, but it seems unnecessarily confusing for the target audience to have so many variants of slightly similar, but subtle different rules.
Ya this is awful in my opinion, they should have kept it standard across all abilities, I get that this adds more depth, but it removes clarity and just adds ANOTHER exception that needs to be remembered onto an edition that was supposed to shave off the gak. Either they intended for their to be multiple forms or rerolling or they are too inept to realize there was a mistake and haven't fixed it now due to embarassment
I wish the MtG rules team had a crack at re-writing warhammer40k, if only to add clarity
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 17:26:00
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
I still don't see anyone presenting any rules that actually support "presumption" on wether a roll is a hit or a miss.
So until I do, I'm going to have to go by what the rules actually say and disregard what plainly appears to be made-up rules.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 17:46:26
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Battleship Captain
|
T10 wrote:I still don't see anyone presenting any rules that actually support "presumption" on wether a roll is a hit or a miss.
So until I do, I'm going to have to go by what the rules actually say and disregard what plainly appears to be made-up rules.
Sure using that logic why even roll dice? Where's the rule that says a 6 on a d6 isn't six results of a 1? Just forego rolling dice and presume all the shot hit.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/15 17:48:06
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Swift Swooping Hawk
|
T10 wrote:I still don't see anyone presenting any rules that actually support "presumption" on wether a roll is a hit or a miss.
You did, in the first post of this thread. Rerolls happen before modifiers.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/15 17:48:31
Craftworld Sciatháin 4180 pts |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/16 04:23:24
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
T10 wrote:I still don't see anyone presenting any rules that actually support "presumption" on wether a roll is a hit or a miss.
So until I do, I'm going to have to go by what the rules actually say and disregard what plainly appears to be made-up rules.
This reads more like you still don’t see anyone presenting any rules that actually support what you want the rules to be, so until you do you’re going to have to go by what you want the rules to say and disregard what people say against your plainly made-up rules.
I get it. It goes against logic and doesn’t seem to make much sense. Even more than that, it disadvantages you at times. I was in the same boat and some of my units took a smack from the nerf bat when I realized I was unintentionally cheating. You’ll get over it and learn to win despite this nonsense.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/10/16 05:03:22
Subject: Hits and re-rolls?
|
 |
Ragin' Ork Dreadnought
|
The worst part about this (that nobody else has mentioned) is how much it slows done rolling even worse than plain re-rolls already do.
Let's say I've got a Space Marine unit that re-rolls to hit, and I've got a +1 modifier, and I have some kind of effect that triggers on 6s. (This is a little exaggerated, but still a totally possible result.)
So when I roll, I need to sort my dice as following piles:
1s, which fail to hit and need to be re-rolled.
2s, which succeed to hit but still need to be re-rolled.
3s and 4s, which are normal hits,
5s and 6s, which are Bonus Effect hits.
Then I re-roll the dice (including several succesful rolls,) and split into several more piles.
So I'm dividing dice in what amounts to six separate ways, and both times my rolls have to be divvied up differently. (The first roll I pull out 1s and 2s, the second roll I just pull out 1s.) It's ridiculous.
|
|
 |
 |
|