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.

Hey guys! I *think* it does indeed work, but for the sake of discussion/to get the word out, I have a question for you. Let's use an example of where this even applies:

- Lets say I have Drukhari Succubus. Her relevant base stats are WS2+, but she comes armed with an Archite Glaive which has a -1-to-hit built into it. IF I give my Succubus a WS +1 Combat Drug, turning her WS into 1+ (note this is permanent), does this now mean a roll of 2 passes?

- A simpler way of asking this, do *modified* 1's *always* fail?

I personally believe (though am very biased), that yes a roll of 2 will hit. I see nothing in the rules that says a WS/BS of 1+ is invalid and the only thing for rolling 1's says along the lines of ~"A roll of 1 always fails irrespective of modifiers"; When they say Roll, do they mean psychical or the dice result? I've already e-mailed GW but unfortunately they just sent me a canned response (so far) about "Our FAQ will be out soon!" so I think for now we'll have to decide ourselves.

If I'm being honest, I don't think there's currently any way to prove it one way or another and is open to the players interpretation. I again argue a WS1+ is valid and it's only physical rolls of 1 that automatically fail. What say you all though!?!


EDIT: Note I am not saying a +1 to my WS, I am saying I have a WS of 1+, permanently, entire game. Does a modified one, when using a 1+ stat, fail?

Edit ###: Read the FAQ that people are citing (the one for Plasma exploding on -1's). FAQ states "A: You apply all re-rolls and modifiers first.". This says nothing about modified ones or 1+ stats, so no offense but it is not relevant to this discussion

"A roll of 1 always fails, irrespective of any modifiers that may apply."

It's a good question, one that I don't think has a concrete answer.

My take on it would be a "roll" of 1 fails, but a "result" of 1 does not, so as long as you don't physically roll a 1, you can hit on a 2+ with a -1 to hit modifier and WS1+.

I remember having this discussion before on Dakka but I don't remember what the consensus or what I thought of it was, I'll see if I can find it. Maybe my mind has changed, I am old and senile.

Edit: On second glance, the wording for plasma uses "roll" too, and modifiers do cause that to overheat. So yeah, a modified 1 will still fail.

Any rolls of 1 fails, regardless of any +/- modifiers unless otherwise stated ("...this weapon automatically hits."). This would include natural rolls of 1's and modified rolls of 1.

Turning WS to +1 is a moot because of the above point, no matter how good your WS/BS is.

Fattimusmcgee wrote:
Hey guys! I *think* it does indeed work, but for the sake of discussion/to get the word out, I have a question for you. Let's use an example of where this even applies:

- Lets say I have Drukhari Succubus. Her relevant base stats are WS2+, but she comes armed with an Archite Glaive which has a -1-to-hit built into it. IF I give my Succubus a WS +1 Combat Drug, turning her WS into 1+, does this now mean a roll of 2 passes?

- A simpler way of asking this, do *modified* 1's *always* fail?


I personally believe (though am very biased), that yes a roll of 2 will hit. I see nothing in the rules that says a WS/BS of 1+ is invalid and the only thing for rolling 1's says along the lines of ~"A roll of 1 always fails irrespective of modifiers"; When they say Roll, do they mean psychical or the dice result? I've already e-mailed GW but unfortunately they just sent me a canned response (so far) about "Our FAQ will be out soon!" so I think for now we'll have to decide ourselves.


If I'm being honest, I don't think there's currently any way to prove it one way or another and is open to the players interpretation. I again argue a WS1+ is valid and it's only physical rolls of 1 that automatically fail. What say you all though!?!

Providing I am understanding you correctly I think you are right yes.

WS2+ with a -1 hit weapon by default. Becomes a 2+ only take 3+ into account for result of roll.

If you add an ability or stratagem (I don't know the Dark Eldar well enough to know full rules for the WS) increases a WS by 1. That would make the WS2+, then -1 so 3+ then back to +1 so taking it back to 2+ to hit. If the -1 hit weapon wasn;t there and was a straight up 2+ with a +1 mod. The physicall roll of 1 would still fail.

Battleprimes says:
"A roll of 1 always fails, irrespective of any modifiers that may apply."

Natural 1s always fail. Modifiers stack so if you have both a -1 and a +1 to hit modifier, they cancel each other out.

However, the combat drug grants a +1 to the WS profile, not to the die roll. If the Succubus already has a WS of 2+, and natural 1s always fail, the model would not benefit from the +1WS and the -1 to hit would mean any 2s rolled would modify to 1s.

A roll is the usually result of the roll after modifiers, but the rule you’ve quoted tells us a roll of 1 (so including a ‘natural’ 1) fails irrespective of any modifiers. So a 1 on the dice is always a miss.

That’s in the Core Rules and doesn’t need an FAQ.

Note that modifiers don’t usually affect your WS or BS, they simply modify the roll. So your To Hit roll for a WS2+ Character still needs at least a 2 to be successful, and we know a natural 1 is a fail from the rule you partially quoted. Even for someone bugged to WS1+ a 1 is a miss - however a natural roll of 2 with a -1 modifier should be a hit. But it’s a roll of 1, so it fails.

 skchsan wrote:
Any rolls of 1 fails, regardless of any +/- modifiers unless otherwise stated ("...this weapon automatically hits."). This would include natural rolls of 1's and modified rolls of 1.

Turning WS to +1 is a moot because of the above point, no matter how good your WS/BS is.

That is a good point. It would also mean that plasma could only overheat on a natural 1, since it says "roll" in the rule.

Looks like i've gone through the same thought process I did before, thinking it did hit then deciding it doesn't. Yay for consistency?

On the plus side, at least they remembered to fix the +1 WS drug for the codex so it works on Succubus now!

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Any rolls of 1 fails, regardless of any +/- modifiers unless otherwise stated ("...this weapon automatically hits."). This would include natural rolls of 1's and modified rolls of 1.

Turning WS to +1 is a moot because of the above point, no matter how good your WS/BS is.

That is a good point. It would also mean that plasma could only overheat on a natural 1, since it says "roll" in the rule.

Unfortunately not for plasma. Plasma weapons have been carefully worded to say hit roll not just rolls. As the modifiers modify the -1 'hit' +1 'hit' they would still be affected.

But you're right it is a good point by them.

 Gojiratoho wrote:
Natural 1s always fail. Modifiers stack so if you have both a -1 and a +1 to hit modifier, they cancel each other out.

However, the combat drug grants a +1 to the WS profile, not to the die roll. If the Succubus already has a WS of 2+, and natural 1s always fail, the model would not benefit from the +1WS and the -1 to hit would mean any 2s rolled would modify to 1s.

Yeah after going though all my mood whiplash again, this is what I would consider to be the correct answer. You'll still miss on rolls of 2 and 1, even with WS1+ due to the -1 to hit modifier, until you get to battle round 3, where the +1 to hit modifier will cancel it out, and you'll be hitting on 2's.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:
Unfortunately not for plasma. Plasma weapons have been carefully worded to say hit roll not just rolls. As the modifiers modify the -1 'hit' +1 'hit' they would still be affected.

But you're right it is a good point by them.

Aye, agreed. If -1 to hit makes plasma explode more (which I believe it does) then a roll of 2 then -1 will be a 1 and miss.

Someone said: On second glance, the wording for plasma uses "roll" too, and modifiers do cause that to overheat. So yeah, a modified 1 will still fail.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
It would also mean that plasma could only overheat on a natural 1, since it says "roll" in the rule.

I think remember seeing an entry in one of the FAQs that confirms this. I'll see if I can find it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's in the Designer's Commentary, and it states that after modifiers are factored in, if the final result is a 1, supercharged plasma injures or kills the firer.

Fattimusmcgee wrote:

Someone said: On second glance, the wording for plasma uses "roll" too, and modifiers do cause that to overheat. So yeah, a modified 1 will still fail.



I disagree guys - The Succubus has a WS1, Plasma dudes don't (or I should say have nothing related to that) so I do not think they're the same

That's not the point. The point is that both the plasma rule and the 1's miss rule use the word "roll". If they both use the same word, they both have to have the same mechanic. Since the FAQ informs us modifiers make plasma explode (and I feel that's a clarificatory FAQ and not a Special Snowflake one) then it's only consistent that WS1+, with -1 to hit, will miss on a physical roll of 1 or 2.

 Gojiratoho wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
It would also mean that plasma could only overheat on a natural 1, since it says "roll" in the rule.

I think remember seeing an entry in one of the FAQs that confirms this. I'll see if I can find it.

It's in the Designer's Commentary:

Q: When making a hit roll with a supercharged plasma weapon, do you determine whether a ‘1’ was rolled before or after applying re-rolls and modifiers?
A: You apply all re-rolls and modifiers first.

I still don't understand that clarification. Surely exploding is a 1/6 chance, and not affected by how well the firer can see the target

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Fattimusmcgee wrote:

Someone said: On second glance, the wording for plasma uses "roll" too, and modifiers do cause that to overheat. So yeah, a modified 1 will still fail.



I disagree guys - The Succubus has a WS1, Plasma dudes don't (or I should say have nothing related to that) so I do not think they're the same

That's not the point. The point is that both the plasma rule and the 1's miss rule use the word "roll". If they both use the same word, they both have to have the same mechanic. Since the FAQ informs us modifiers make plasma explode (and I feel that's a clarificatory FAQ and not a Special Snowflake one) then it's only consistent that WS1+, with -1 to hit, will miss on a physical roll of 1 or 2.

Aha, I think I follow you. Well hmmmm, well now I have to wonder if a WS1+ negates that (as there are numerous rules, ie "Cant shoot after Advancing" that say you can't do something yet you can w/the correct rule to counteract it). Obv. theres nothing concrete to support this claim yet


Edit 3: Read below, I still don't think the FAQ says it will fail. ("A: You apply all re-rolls and modifiers first." - not related to 1-up stats OR modified ones always failing)

Fattimusmcgee wrote:
Aha, I think I follow you. Well hmmmm, well now I have to wonder if a WS1+ negates that (as there are numerous rules, ie "Cant shoot after Advancing" that say you can't do something yet you can w/the correct rule to counteract it). Obv. theres nothing concrete to support this claim yet

WS1+ doesn't explicitly counter that though, it's just a rare characteristic value.

Alright, sorry guys but I read the FAQ, it states:


"A: You apply all re-rolls and modifiers first."


I still don't think this says a WS1+ fails w/a modified 1. Yes, the 2 turns to a 1, but I still have the 1+ stat, it doesn't say ANYTHING about a "modified one fails to hit". Hopefully this makes sense (and I hope I don't sound aggressive or anything ).

In the Plasma's case, it was talking about how the model gets a MW on a 1 - still not related to modified hits or 1-up stats

Fattimusmcgee wrote:
Alright, sorry guys but I read the FAQ, it states:


"A: You apply all re-rolls and modifiers first."


I still don't think this says a WS1+ fails w/a modified 1. Yes, the 2 turns to a 1, but I still have the 1+ stat, it doesn't say ANYTHING about a "modified one fails to hit". Hopefully this makes sense (and I hope I don't sound aggressive or anything ).

In the Plasma's case, it was talking about how the model gets a MW on a 1 - still not related to modified hits or 1-up stats

It doesn't need to say anything about modifiers. The rule says "A roll of 1 always fails, irrespective of any modifiers that may apply."

The key part here is the word "roll" and the word "always". A "roll" of 1 always fails. Always. Every time. At all times. On all occasions. The plasma FAQ confirms that a modified result is still a "roll" of 1, otherwise the plasma rule wouldn't work. Thus, since they both have the same word "roll", they must also behave the same mechanically.

This is pretty clear cut - 1 always fails. It is a protection to prevent auto hit's.

The only thing 1+ to hit does for you is make it impossible to overheat on an unmodified shot. It also makes you hit on a 2+ if you are hitting something with -1 to hit.

Fattimusmcgee wrote:
Alright, sorry guys but I read the FAQ, it states:


"A: You apply all re-rolls and modifiers first."


I still don't think this says a WS1+ fails w/a modified 1. Yes, the 2 turns to a 1, but I still have the 1+ stat, it doesn't say ANYTHING about a "modified one fails to hit". Hopefully this makes sense (and I hope I don't sound aggressive or anything ).

In the Plasma's case, it was talking about how the model gets a MW on a 1 - still not related to modified hits or 1-up stats

I think this is right.

We have the situation of WS of 1+, and a weapon with a -1 to hit on the roll.

We roll a 2. Irrespective of any modifiers that may apply, we have not rolled a 1, so don't trigger an always fail.

The 2 gets modified down to a result of 1, which passes the WS check of 1+.

JakeSiren wrote:
I think this is right.

We have the situation of WS of 1+, and a weapon with a -1 to hit on the roll.

We roll a 2. Irrespective of any modifiers that may apply, we have not rolled a 1, so don't trigger an always fail.

The 2 gets modified down to a result of 1, which passes the WS check of 1+.

As we already went though, this means -1 to hit doesn't cause plasma to explode on a 2, which it does as per the Designers Commentary. Since both rules use the word "roll", they have to act the same.

Another similar situation I've had is Lias Issodon's stealth armour, which gives him a 0+ save when he's in cover, play it as "A 1 still fails his save, but you need Ap-3 or better to start modifying it."

 Valkyrie wrote:
Another similar situation I've had is Lias Issodon's stealth armour, which gives him a 0+ save when he's in cover, play it as "A 1 still fails his save, but you need Ap-3 or better to start modifying it."

No, that's not how it works either. If you have a 0+, hit by an AP-1 weapon, and then roll a 2, the 2 gets modified down to a 1, which fails.

Again, if it worked the way you claim plasma would never explode except on a natural 1, which is not the case.

It might seem unintuitive but it's the only way things can work without having two different mechanics for the exact same worded rule. As a RaWphile that would boil my onions to no end.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
I think this is right.

We have the situation of WS of 1+, and a weapon with a -1 to hit on the roll.

We roll a 2. Irrespective of any modifiers that may apply, we have not rolled a 1, so don't trigger an always fail.

The 2 gets modified down to a result of 1, which passes the WS check of 1+.

As we already went though, this means -1 to hit doesn't cause plasma to explode on a 2, which it does as per the Designers Commentary. Since both rules use the word "roll", they have to act the same.

You are ignoring that the auto fail has a qualifier on it (being that it is irrespective of modifiers) where as plasma does not.

Plasma uses the word "roll", but doesn't use the qualifier "irrespective of any modifiers", and that's the key difference. With a WS1+ and a -1 to hit, a natural 2 will still succeed because it isn't a roll of 1 irrespective of any modifiers, it's a modified roll of 1, which is a hit.

EDIT: I was beaten to the punch, but JakeSiren is right. Plasma only cares about the final result of the roll, but the auto-fail clause explicitly says to ignore modifiers when checking to see if it triggered.

Benn Roe wrote:
Plasma uses the word "roll", but doesn't use the qualifier "irrespective of any modifiers", and that's the key difference. With a WS1+ and a -1 to hit, a natural 2 will still succeed because it isn't a roll of 1 irrespective of any modifiers, it's a modified roll of 1, which is a hit.

EDIT: I was beaten to the punch, but JakeSiren is right. Plasma only cares about the final result of the roll, but the auto-fail clause explicitly says to ignore modifiers when checking to see if it triggered.

Irrespective does not mean ignore. Irrespective means it doesn't matter if it is with or without modifiers.

I know Dictionary Definitions are considered an automatic fail (see what I did thar ) but a quick search of the googles shows that the definition of Irrespective is "not taking (something) into account; regardless of".

Thus, if it is a roll of 1, regardless of whether modifiers made it a 1 or not, it's a fail.

The "irrespective of any modifiers" is meant to cover a different situation.

Overcharged plasma can auto-fail on a natural roll of 1, but the overheat portion can be overridden by a +1 hit modifier.

In this case, an overcharged plasma is fired, and 1 was rolled for the hit. The overcharged plasma fails to hit, but its wielder does not suffer the overheat penalty.

Alternatively, you roll a 2 on a to-hit roll on an OC plasma, but you are subject to -1 hit modifier. So now you auto fail the to hit because your modified hit roll is a 1, AND you overheat because your modified to hit is a 1.

To be fair, an "email" from "GW" is even more useless than dictionary definitions. If it's not in a Codex or Official FAQ, it's not really relevant to a rules discussion. I remember the bad old days where you could send them the same questions 3 times and get 4 different answers.

The question is really "Can a statline that resolves with dice roles (i.e. WS/BS/SV) be modified to be 1+". I don't think it can, as that breaks the idea of 1s failing, but I don't see anywhere that explicitly forbids it. The Modifying Characteristics sidebar on page 175 of the BRB doesn't mention it, nor did I see anything in the Designer's Commentary or Stepping Into a New Edition