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 just a small(?) question. It’s all theoretical and i just open up extreme cases to show my point.

So we have a unit with mixed weapons, like a unit of 10 chosen with 4 Plasmaguns and 6 Boltguns, shooting on a Unit with Multiple Wounds like 9 Tyranid Warriors in 22''.

The Chaos Player has 4 Plasma shots (Overcharged) and 6 Boltgun shots.

We will assume that 4 Plasmashots wounds and 4 Boltershots wounds, Tyranid Warriors makes none of their Armour Saves.

So Plasmas first, then Bolter:
1. 4 Plasma Shots, 4 Hits, 8 Wounds, 0 Saves => 2, 2 (†) , 2, 2 (†)
2. 6 Bolter Shots, 4 Hits, 4 Wounds, 0 Saves => 1, 1, 1 (†), 1

=> 3 Dead, 1 with 2 Life left, 5 left with Full Health


So Bolter First, Plasma Second:
1. 6 Bolter Shots, 4 Hits, 4 Wounds, 0 Saves => 1, 1, 1 (†), 1
2. 4 Plasma Shots, 4 Hits, 8 Wounds, 0 Saves => 2 (†), 2, 2 (†), 2

=> 3 Dead, 1 with 1 Life left, 5 left with Full Health

Correct so far?

----

The rules (for fast dice rolling) state that i CAN roll same weapon attacks with the same profile. Which mean i don’t have to, so let’s make a different calc.
So he also can shoot his weapons one by one and as far as I understood choose which weapon to shoot each time.

So let’s take the same case with a different order of shots;
1. 1 Shot Plasma => Hit, Wound, 2
2. 1 Shot Bolter => Hit, Wound, 1
3. 1 Shot Plasma => Hit, Wound, 2
4. 1 Shot Bolter => Hit, Wound, 1
5. 1 Shot Plasma => Hit, Wound, 2
6. 1 Shot Bolter => Hit, Wound, 1
7. 1 Shot Plasma => Hit, Wound, 2
8. 1 Shot Bolter => Hit, Wound, 1
9. 1 Shot Bolter => Miss
10. 1 Shot Bolter => Miss

That's 2, 1 (†), 2, 1 (†), 2, 1 (†), 2, 1 (†)

This is an extreme case, just to show the possibilities. But it can always happen when wounds or damage is uneven.

Any logical errors i made? Or is there a rule to prevent this, as it will take a lot of more time but will have no benefit in most cases? Or is it something you just do when Wounds are uneven?

Fast Rolling is an optional exception. Default is one by one. Choose whatever will maximise wounds caused and models killes, dude. ;-)

And beware sharp and pointy metal models thrown in your face for taking so long.

Fast rolling is not actually optional. The rules don't say that you "can". They say that you roll all the dice together if all of the attacks have the same BS, S, damage, etc. And certainly fast rolling is not actually optional regardless -- this is clearly slow play and would get you told off at a tournament or punched in a pick-up game.

Dionysodorus wrote:
Fast rolling is not actually optional. The rules don't say that you "can". They say that you roll all the dice together if all of the attacks have the same BS, S, damage, etc. And certainly fast rolling is not actually optional regardless -- this is clearly slow play and would get you told off at a tournament or punched in a pick-up game.

You're incorrect.

Fast Dice Rolling
The rules for resolving attacks have been written assuming you will make them one at a time.

...is literally the first sentence. This tells you one by one is the default.

However, it is possible to speed up your battles by rolling the dice for similar attacks together.

...second sentence. It says it's possible to fast roll, not mandatory. Fast rolling is an option to speed things up. You're not obligated to use it.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Fast rolling is not actually optional. The rules don't say that you "can". They say that you roll all the dice together if all of the attacks have the same BS, S, damage, etc. And certainly fast rolling is not actually optional regardless -- this is clearly slow play and would get you told off at a tournament or punched in a pick-up game.

You're incorrect.

Fast Dice Rolling
The rules for resolving attacks have been written assuming you will make them one at a time.

...is literally the first sentence. This tells you one by one is the default.

However, it is possible to speed up your battles by rolling the dice for similar attacks together.

...second sentence. It says it's possible to fast roll, not mandatory. Fast rolling is an option to speed things up. You're not obligated to use it.

This is simply not what these sentences mean. Yes, the main rules for resolving attacks are written assuming you're rolling them one at a time. It doesn't follow that you have permission to roll them one at a time no matter what. The fast dice rolling rules go on to tell you about a specific situation in which you must roll multiple attacks together. The second sentence says that it is possible to fast roll. "Possible" does not imply permission to do otherwise. For example, it is possible that when a vehicle is destroyed it explodes and does mortal wounds to everything around it. It does not follow that I can just choose not to have my vehicle explode. Further, "possible" does not even strictly imply "possibly not", although it has this connotation in most cases. But we don't need to get into that here -- it is possible to speed up battles sometimes, and sometimes not. When you have similar attacks, you roll the dice together. When you don't have similar attacks, you don't.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Fast rolling is not actually optional. The rules don't say that you "can". They say that you roll all the dice together if all of the attacks have the same BS, S, damage, etc. And certainly fast rolling is not actually optional regardless -- this is clearly slow play and would get you told off at a tournament or punched in a pick-up game.

You're incorrect.

Fast Dice Rolling
The rules for resolving attacks have been written assuming you will make them one at a time.

...is literally the first sentence. This tells you one by one is the default.

However, it is possible to speed up your battles by rolling the dice for similar attacks together.

...second sentence. It says it's possible to fast roll, not mandatory. Fast rolling is an option to speed things up. You're not obligated to use it.

This is simply not what these sentences mean. Yes, the main rules for resolving attacks are written assuming you're rolling them one at a time. It doesn't follow that you have permission to roll them one at a time no matter what. The fast dice rolling rules go on to tell you about a specific situation in which you must roll multiple attacks together. The second sentence says that it is possible to fast roll. "Possible" does not imply permission to do otherwise. For example, it is possible that when a vehicle is destroyed it explodes and does mortal wounds to everything around it. It does not follow that I can just choose not to have my vehicle explode. Further, "possible" does not even strictly imply "possibly not", although it has this connotation in most cases. But we don't need to get into that here -- it is possible to speed up battles sometimes, and sometimes not. When you have similar attacks, you roll the dice together. When you don't have similar attacks, you don't.

It really is what they mean. There's no other way to interpret them. You're incorrect.

Possible does not mean "must fast roll". It gives permission to 'not slow roll' by using the Fast Rolling system, but doesn't mandate fast rolling. The first sentence tells you they assume you will make attacks one at a time. The next says "but you could do it faster this way if you like". This isn't even a greay area so I don't know why you seem intent on making it one.

(FWIW , the word "possible" does not appear in the 'Explodes' rule, so it's not a relevant thing to bring up. False equivalence, sir.)

There are times that fast rolling doesn't actually work, when I was resolving land raider lascannon damage against crisis suits, I have had my opponent tell me that because I did a fast roll and paired dice up for better damage (adding a 2 and 1 damage up instead of adding one to the 5*) I was breaking the rules (not 100% sure on this but I wasn't too bothered about arguing it as the game wasn't going well for him.) so there are times when fast rolling doesn't work.

*For anyone interested he was arguing I could have rolled the 1 or 2 first followed by the 5, therefore not killing the second suit. Any opinions?

Tristanleo wrote:
There are times that fast rolling doesn't actually work, when I was resolving land raider lascannon damage against crisis suits, I have had my opponent tell me that because I did a fast roll and paired dice up for better damage (adding a 2 and 1 damage up instead of adding one to the 5*) I was breaking the rules (not 100% sure on this but I wasn't too bothered about arguing it as the game wasn't going well for him.) so there are times when fast rolling doesn't work.

*For anyone interested he was arguing I could have rolled the 1 or 2 first followed by the 5, therefore not killing the second suit. Any opinions?

You should have rolled hits together for speed, then wounds and saves one by one for accuracy. It's the fairest way and can drastically change casualties at times. It's actually the only way the rules can function with multi-wound models in a unit anyway, and is as the Fast Rolling rules tell you to do it.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

It really is what they mean. There's no other way to interpret them. You're incorrect.

Possible does not mean "must fast roll". It gives permission to 'not slow roll' by using the Fast Rolling system, but doesn't mandate fast rolling. The first sentence tells you they assume you will make attacks one at a time. The next says "but you could do it faster this way if you like". This isn't even a greay area so I don't know why you seem intent on making it one.

(FWIW , the word "possible" does appear in the 'Explodes' rule, so it's not a relevant thing to bring up. False equivalence, sir.)

I mean, I gave you another way to interpret them and you don't appear to actually have an argument for your position other than asserting that "possible" must mean "may", which is just clearly not true -- ask anyone -- and then misquoting the second sentence.

I don't know why you're talking about what the Explodes rule says. I didn't say that the Explodes rule used the word "possible". I wrote a perfectly normal English sentence. Possibly, vehicles explode when they are destroyed. Do you actually disagree with this? It is also possible for 10 Guardsmen to kill Magnus in one volley. Right? This is all clearly possible according to everyone's (except I guess maybe your) understanding of what the word actually means. There's no implication of permission one way or the other, is the point. Are you saying that "possible" has some special rules significance apart from its ordinary English meaning? What evidence is there for this?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tristanleo wrote:
There are times that fast rolling doesn't actually work, when I was resolving land raider lascannon damage against crisis suits, I have had my opponent tell me that because I did a fast roll and paired dice up for better damage (adding a 2 and 1 damage up instead of adding one to the 5*) I was breaking the rules (not 100% sure on this but I wasn't too bothered about arguing it as the game wasn't going well for him.) so there are times when fast rolling doesn't work.

*For anyone interested he was arguing I could have rolled the 1 or 2 first followed by the 5, therefore not killing the second suit. Any opinions?

Fast dice rolling does not allow you to roll damage together. Saves and damage are always rolled one at a time, RAW, though in most cases people will roll all saves together to save time, and often you can roll damage together too. But sometimes it's important to roll damage separately, yes.

'Possible' means something can be done, not that it must be done.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

It really is what they mean. There's no other way to interpret them. You're incorrect.

Possible does not mean "must fast roll". It gives permission to 'not slow roll' by using the Fast Rolling system, but doesn't mandate fast rolling. The first sentence tells you they assume you will make attacks one at a time. The next says "but you could do it faster this way if you like". This isn't even a greay area so I don't know why you seem intent on making it one.

(FWIW , the word "possible" does appear in the 'Explodes' rule, so it's not a relevant thing to bring up. False equivalence, sir.)

I mean, I gave you another way to interpret them and you don't appear to actually have an argument for your position other than asserting that "possible" must mean "may", which is just clearly not true -- ask anyone -- and then misquoting the second sentence.

I don't know why you're talking about what the Explodes rule says. I didn't say that the Explodes rule used the word "possible". I wrote a perfectly normal English sentence. Possibly, vehicles explode when they are destroyed. Do you actually disagree with this? It is also possible for 10 Guardsmen to kill Magnus in one volley. Right? This is all clearly possible according to everyone's (except I guess maybe your) understanding of what the word actually means. There's no implication of permission one way or the other, is the point. Are you saying that "possible" has some special rules significance apart from its ordinary English meaning? What evidence is there for this?

You made up a sentence re: Explodes that is not in the rules then suggested it was the same as the wording of an actual rule. You didn't demonstrate anything other than false equivalence. Let's move on from that as it's totally irrelevant from the moment you brought it up.

You're in the wrong regarding Fast Rolling, dude, honestly. Go read it thoroughly again. There is permission explicitly given to use Fast Rolling to speed up your game, and there is no obligation to use it mandated.

By the way I copied and pasted the rules sentences from a PDF onscreen; I misquoted nothing. My re-phrasings I posted "in inverted commas" to further illuminate meanings are accurate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghaz wrote:
'Possible' means something can be done, not that it must be done.

This guy gets it.

 Ghaz wrote:
'Possible' means something can be done, not that it must be done.

I don't see that anyone is claiming that "possible" implies "must". I'm not sure who you're responding to.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
'Possible' means something can be done, not that it must be done.

I don't see that anyone is claiming that "possible" implies "must". I'm not sure who you're responding to.

You were attempting to... not being confrontational but that was what your post was saying.

Dionysodorus wrote:
I mean, I gave you another way to interpret them and you don't appear to actually have an argument for your position other than asserting that "possible" must mean "may", which is just clearly not true -- ask anyone -- and then misquoting the second sentence.

This is what I was responding to. Here you're trying to claim that you must use fast dice rolling, while the word 'possible' only means that it can be done. That literally means you may do it, since it is possible to do it.

 Ghaz wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
I mean, I gave you another way to interpret them and you don't appear to actually have an argument for your position other than asserting that "possible" must mean "may", which is just clearly not true -- ask anyone -- and then misquoting the second sentence.

This is what I was responding to. Here you're trying to claim that you must use fast dice rolling, while the word 'possible' only means that it can be done. That literally means you may do it, since it is possible to do it.

Ah, I see the confusion. To clarify: he's saying that the use of "possible" means that you have permission to do this thing, and also permission not to do this thing. That is, it's being used the way we might casually use "may", which also implies "may not" -- if I say that you "may" do something, in a context where I'm clearly talking about permission, then I'm implying that you could also choose not to do the thing. I was pointing out that actually this is not how people use "possible". I agree with you. "Possible" means that the thing could happen. In at least some situations you will be able to do it. But it does not imply that there will be situations where you can choose whether to do it or not. And in fact the rules go on to simply say that in certain situations you just go ahead and roll all of the attacks together. I gave some helpful examples of this natural use of "possible", such as that it is possible that a vehicle explodes when it is destroyed.

You keep choosing one word and playing thesaurus. Take the phrase instead...

"It is possible to" does mean, in this situation, "you may".

And of course, "you may" does *not* mean "you must". "It is possible to" does not mean "you must". It provides an option.

Does that help?

 JohnnyHell wrote:
You keep choosing one word and playing thesaurus. Take the phrase instead...

"It is possible to" does mean, in this situation, "you may".

And of course, "you may" does *not* mean "you must".

Does that help?

Yes, sure. I agree with this, on the understanding that the use of "may" here is not implying choice. E.g.: you may receive a text message tomorrow. You may! But it's not really up to you.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
You keep choosing one word and playing thesaurus. Take the phrase instead...

"It is possible to" does mean, in this situation, "you may".

And of course, "you may" does *not* mean "you must".

Does that help?

Yes, sure. I agree with this, on the understanding that the use of "may" here is not implying choice. E.g.: you may receive a text message tomorrow. You may! But it's not really up to you.

This isn't a grammar board for unrelated stuff dude. We're discussing the rule not your sandwiches on Tuesdays or text messages.

You're bringing up things totally unconnected to wargaming with different uses of language.

And no, I don't agree that "you may" is in any way a compulsion. You're wrong on that one.

Literally everyone but Dio seems to get this

Something being possible does not make it mandatory. Later it tells you what fast rolling means , which does not require you to actually fast roll as this remains entirely possible. The default is to not fast roll. There is no other possible way to correctly parse the fast roll rules.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

This isn't a grammar board for unrelated stuff dude. We're discussing the rule not your sandwiches on Tuesdays or text messages.

You're bringing up things totally unconnected to wargaming with different uses of language.

And no, I don't agree that "you may" is in any way a compulsion. You're wrong on that one.

I can only ask that you reread my posts at this point because I think I've been plenty clear. You keep insisting that GW is using words like "possible" in very specific wargaming-centric ways that nobody else is familiar with without providing any reason at all to think that they don't mean "possible" in the ordinary English sense of the word. I've never said that "may" implies "must" -- I've explicitly rejected this in this thread.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

This isn't a grammar board for unrelated stuff dude. We're discussing the rule not your sandwiches on Tuesdays or text messages.

You're bringing up things totally unconnected to wargaming with different uses of language.

And no, I don't agree that "you may" is in any way a compulsion. You're wrong on that one.

I can only ask that you reread my posts at this point because I think I've been plenty clear. You keep insisting that GW is using words like "possible" in very specific wargaming-centric ways that nobody else is familiar with without providing any reason at all to think that they don't mean "possible" in the ordinary English sense of the word. I've never said that "may" implies "must" -- I've explicitly rejected this in this thread.

What are you even arguing now? You've lost me. Do you agree that Fast Rolling is optional or do you have some proof in the Rules to support your 'must Fast Roll' viewpoint?

I think they’ve lost everyone. Their interpretation literally has zero rules or language basis. It’s a nonsense.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

This isn't a grammar board for unrelated stuff dude. We're discussing the rule not your sandwiches on Tuesdays or text messages.

You're bringing up things totally unconnected to wargaming with different uses of language.

And no, I don't agree that "you may" is in any way a compulsion. You're wrong on that one.

I can only ask that you reread my posts at this point because I think I've been plenty clear. You keep insisting that GW is using words like "possible" in very specific wargaming-centric ways that nobody else is familiar with without providing any reason at all to think that they don't mean "possible" in the ordinary English sense of the word. I've never said that "may" implies "must" -- I've explicitly rejected this in this thread.

What are you even arguing now? You've lost me. Do you agree that Fast Rolling is optional or do you have some proof in the Rules to support your 'must Fast Roll' viewpoint?

My proof, which you would have seen if you actually tried to read my posts, was that the later parts of the fast rolling rules go on to simply say that under certain conditions you roll all the attacks together, without giving you any choice in the matter.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

This isn't a grammar board for unrelated stuff dude. We're discussing the rule not your sandwiches on Tuesdays or text messages.

You're bringing up things totally unconnected to wargaming with different uses of language.

And no, I don't agree that "you may" is in any way a compulsion. You're wrong on that one.

I can only ask that you reread my posts at this point because I think I've been plenty clear. You keep insisting that GW is using words like "possible" in very specific wargaming-centric ways that nobody else is familiar with without providing any reason at all to think that they don't mean "possible" in the ordinary English sense of the word. I've never said that "may" implies "must" -- I've explicitly rejected this in this thread.

What are you even arguing now? You've lost me. Do you agree that Fast Rolling is optional or do you have some proof in the Rules to support your 'must Fast Roll' viewpoint?

My proof, which you would have seen if you actually tried to read my posts, was that the later parts of the fast rolling rules go on to simply say that under certain conditions you roll all the attacks together, without giving you any choice in the matter.

That isn't proof. Stop taking things separately, and you won't get confused. You can't take half a rule and apply it on its own. The Fast Rolling sidebar is all one chunk of rules... if you use Fast Rolling, you follow them, and the paragraph explains how. If you don't, you don't.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

This isn't a grammar board for unrelated stuff dude. We're discussing the rule not your sandwiches on Tuesdays or text messages.

You're bringing up things totally unconnected to wargaming with different uses of language.

And no, I don't agree that "you may" is in any way a compulsion. You're wrong on that one.

I can only ask that you reread my posts at this point because I think I've been plenty clear. You keep insisting that GW is using words like "possible" in very specific wargaming-centric ways that nobody else is familiar with without providing any reason at all to think that they don't mean "possible" in the ordinary English sense of the word. I've never said that "may" implies "must" -- I've explicitly rejected this in this thread.

What are you even arguing now? You've lost me. Do you agree that Fast Rolling is optional or do you have some proof in the Rules to support your 'must Fast Roll' viewpoint?

My proof, which you would have seen if you actually tried to read my posts, was that the later parts of the fast rolling rules go on to simply say that under certain conditions you roll all the attacks together, without giving you any choice in the matter.

The later parts are only accessed by doing the beginning parts, so of course the language in them is written the way it is. The whole rule is basically an if-then statement. If you do fast rolling, then this is how. They don't need to add "If you use fast rolling" at the start of each sentence, as it's assumed you're only following the rule if you are using fast rolling. You don't follow the second half if you're not using the first half.

Dionysodorus wrote:
I can only ask that you reread my posts at this point because I think I've been plenty clear. .

Don't confuse being clear with being correct.

Ok enough already .

I got a question, you fast dice separate but matching guns to shoot at a unit, roll to hit , roll to wound .

When does your opponent make his saves and apply wounds?

After each stage of fast dice? to hit wound then saves?

Or you roll to hit and wound with all your guns in anyway shape or form, and a wound pool created and your opponent gets to choose who lives or dies?

Im thinking no matter how you choose to roll your attacking shots, the wounds are put into a pool, separated of course so as not to confuse multi damage wounds , then your opponent rolls saves and applies damage to models his choice.?

Wounds are always allocated singly, whether fast rolling for number of hits and wounds or rolling them singly. For fast dice method, you apply wounds singly after you've fast diced to determine how many wounds there are. The fast dice rolling is just for weapons of the same weapon type, etc, and there's nothing stating that you go on to fast roll other weapon groups before allocating wounds, so you would finish resolving that group you fast rolled for before rolling for a different weapon group in the unit.