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.

Whole crakc, 6 pages of discusion on the mark of the wulfen. I rarly even play my SW anymore...I feel like a troll

 DeathReaper wrote:
That is why I said rules disagree with him.

Well it sounded like you were saying the rules don't allow you to re-roll single dice when they do, just not in every case.

rigeld2 wrote:Modifying dice rolls defines a 2d6 roll as a modified dice roll.
If you agree that you cannot roll an individual d6 out of a 2d6 roll, then you also agree that modifiers are applied before evaluating if you're able to roll or not.

That is an assumption that has no evidence outside of your imagination. You are effectively saying that D6+1 and 2D6 are the same thing, where in fact you are trying to compare apples to cars.

2D6 is not meant to be taken seperately, as it generates values between 2 and 12.
D6 + 1 is meant to generate values between 2 and 7

There is absolutely no mathematical rule that allows the two to behave in the same manner.

The discourse appears to be such:
1. D6 is the dice roll, with +1 being a modifier added to the fice roll to create the final value
2. D6+1 is the dice roll, where the +1 is considered part of the D6 value

this is an entirely seperate argument from the "2D6 =/= 2*D6" debate.

 azazel the cat wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Modifying dice rolls defines a 2d6 roll as a modified dice roll.
If you agree that you cannot roll an individual d6 out of a 2d6 roll, then you also agree that modifiers are applied before evaluating if you're able to roll or not.

That is an assumption that has no evidence outside of your imagination. You are effectively saying that D6+1 and 2D6 are the same thing, where in fact you are trying to compare apples to cars.

2D6 is not meant to be taken seperately, as it generates values between 2 and 12.
D6 + 1 is meant to generate values between 2 and 7

There is absolutely no mathematical rule that allows the two to behave in the same manner.

The discourse appears to be such:
1. D6 is the dice roll, with +1 being a modifier added to the fice roll to create the final value
2. D6+1 is the dice roll, where the +1 is considered part of the D6 value

this is an entirely seperate argument from the "2D6 =/= 2*D6" debate.

Very good, because in the 2*D6 example there is still a chance for a roll of a 1 while in 2d6 the roll is 2-12.

liturgies of blood wrote:Very good, because in the 2*D6 example there is still a chance for a roll of a 1 while in 2d6 the roll is 2-12.

Yes, exactly. 2*D6 gives the potential for 2x 1s, whereas 2D6 only gives values of 2-12. However, that is an entirely different thread (that I do not want to revive).

 azazel the cat wrote:
That is an assumption that has no evidence outside of your imagination. You are effectively saying that D6+1 and 2D6 are the same thing, where in fact you are trying to compare apples to cars.

2D6 is not meant to be taken seperately, as it generates values between 2 and 12.
D6 + 1 is meant to generate values between 2 and 7

There is absolutely no mathematical rule that allows the two to behave in the same manner.

The discourse appears to be such:
1. D6 is the dice roll, with +1 being a modifier added to the fice roll to create the final value
2. D6+1 is the dice roll, where the +1 is considered part of the D6 value

this is an entirely seperate argument from the "2D6 =/= 2*D6" debate.

Except its not separate.
We know that a 2d6 roll is defined as a modified dice roll. Do you agree?
We know that you are not permitted to re-roll part of a multi-d6 dice roll. Agreed?
So if you can't re-roll part of a d6+d6 roll, why are you allowed to re-roll part of a d6+1 roll?

rigeld2 wrote:
Except its not separate.
We know that a 2d6 roll is defined as a modified dice roll. Do you agree?
We know that you are not permitted to re-roll part of a multi-d6 dice roll. Agreed?
So if you can't re-roll part of a d6+d6 roll, why are you allowed to re-roll part of a d6+1 roll?

Citation for that?

I've cited it in the thread. Ill quote it for you so maybe you won't miss it this time.

You may also be told to roll a number of dice in one go, which is written as 2D6, 3D6 and so on. Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together, so a 2D6 roll is two dice rolled and added together for a result of 2-12.

Page 5.

rigeld2 wrote:

We know that you are not permitted to re-roll part of a multi-d6 dice roll. Agreed?
So if you can't re-roll part of a d6+d6 roll, why are you allowed to re-roll part of a d6+1 roll?

Well the rules say you must re-roll 2D6 together unless told to.
This train falls down right there.

No, actually - it doesn't.
It shows that the entire modified result is considered the roll.

rigeld2 wrote:
No, actually - it doesn't.
It shows that the entire modified result is considered the roll.

If you re-roll a single 2D6 or 3D6 roll, you must re-roll both of the dice and not just some of them, unless the rule granting the re-roll specifies otherwise.

The rules do say it.

So lets look at this,

sometimes you have to modify the number rolled on the dice(or "the roll").

The roll is the number rolled on the dice. So a dice that shows a one is a diceroll of a 1.

The next sentence is not important as it notes how to write the modifiers.

Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result.

The third sentence differentiates the roll from the result.
The 4th sentence shows how the process works, the number on the dice is differentiated from the result.
5th sentence what XD6 is and the 6th sentence shows how to roll it.
7th sentence doesn't matter.

The re-rolls from above show a more specific example of re-rolls not of all modified dice but of the XD6.

The re-roll section notes a 2d6 roll.
We know that a 2d6 roll is by definition a modified roll.
So we have a rule that equates the result of rolling two dice (a 2d6 roll) with its result.

Where? Can you give the quote please?

I see in the modified dice paragraph the roll is called a 2D6 roll but that the result is what you get when you add the two dice. I don't see where the roll and the result are equated in that.

 DeathReaper wrote:
That is why I said rules disagree with him.

Rules neither agree nor disagree.
They just are.

azazel the cat wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Except its not separate.
We know that a 2d6 roll is defined as a modified dice roll. Do you agree?
We know that you are not permitted to re-roll part of a multi-d6 dice roll. Agreed?
So if you can't re-roll part of a d6+d6 roll, why are you allowed to re-roll part of a d6+1 roll?

Citation for that?

rigeld2 wrote:I've cited it in the thread. Ill quote it for you so maybe you won't miss it this time.

You may also be told to roll a number of dice in one go, which is written as 2D6, 3D6 and so on. Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together, so a 2D6 roll is two dice rolled and added together for a result of 2-12.

Page 5.

How about you actually cite what I've asked? Because I don't see any references to 2D6 being defined as a modified dice roll.

Since the section I quoted is under the modified dice rolls section, I did exactly that.

page 5 "MODIFYING DICE ROLLS" section.

"You may also be told to roll a number of dice in one go, which is written as 2D6, 3D6 and so on. Roll the indicated number of dice and add them together, so a 2D6 roll is two dice rolled and added together"

A number of dice in one go is a modified Dice Roll. for example 2d6 is a modified dice roll, as it tells you in the modified dice rolls about 2D6 rolls.

In the same section it says "For example, D6+2 means roll a dice and add 2 to the number on the dice for a total between 3 and 8."

Therefore D6+2 = 3-8, and D6+1 = 2-7.

So an Eldar army with two Autarchs will be able to bring in all of his reserves on Turn 2 regardless if he rolls a 1 (which still fails) because the final result is all that matters and would be a 3. Now if only my Autarchs could affect my Deathwing allies with that...

 Happyjew wrote:
So an Eldar army with two Autarchs will be able to bring in all of his reserves on Turn 2 regardless if he rolls a 1 (which still fails) because the final result is all that matters and would be a 3. Now if only my Autarchs could affect my Deathwing allies with that...

Good try, but incorrect.

The reserve rules specify that "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124 (This is further proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll).

Does the Wolf standard specify a natural roll of a 1 may be re-rolled? (If it specifies a natural roll of a 1 then this debate is over, of course if it does not, it is over as well).

Sigh, sadly I can see both sides to the party. I will continue to re-roll 1's on a MotW roll, and if my opponent disagrees, then we'll roll-off to see who's interpretation is correct. At the end of the day, its not a huge deal.

*sigh*

MODIFYING DICE ROLLS (BRB, p. 5)
Sometimes, you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice (or 'on the roll'). This is noted as D6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result. For example, D6+2 means roll a dice and add 2 to the number on the dice for a total between 3 and 8. You may also be told to roll a number of dice... etc.

WOLF STANDARD (SW Codex, p. 62)
...For the duration of the next Assault Phase, all models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.


Please pay attention to the wording of the Modifying Dice Rolls section. It clearly defines and demonstrates the difference between the "roll" and the "final result": the roll is prior to the modifier, whereas the final result is after the modifier.

Now look at the wording of the Wolf Standard. it states that a unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1. It says rolls. It does NOT say "results of a 1".

Because the Wolf Standard allows the player to re-roll the ROLLS of a 1 (as opposed to the RESULT of a 1), the player definitely CAN use the Wolf Standard on Mark of the Wulfen.



There. Done. This discussion should be over now.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
So an Eldar army with two Autarchs will be able to bring in all of his reserves on Turn 2 regardless if he rolls a 1 (which still fails) because the final result is all that matters and would be a 3. Now if only my Autarchs could affect my Deathwing allies with that...

Good try, but incorrect.

The reserve rules specify that "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124 (This is further proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll).

Does the Wolf standard specify a natural roll of a 1 may be re-rolled? (If it specifies a natural roll of a 1 then this debate is over, of course if it does not, it is over as well).

Dang, I knew I was missing something.

So have the no side found a reason yet?
We had look at d6+1 and roll vs result.
Next we had 2d6 in re-rolls equates result with result(not roll).
So where does it equate a roll with the result?
If you cannot show that a roll is the result in a modified roll why can you not re-roll the dice in a single d6 modified roll?

The reserve rules say that "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124 (This is further proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll).

They actually specify "a natural roll of a 1" so there is a difference between a roll of a 1, and a natural roll of a 1 as far as the rules are concerned.

I repeat myself:


MODIFYING DICE ROLLS (BRB, p. 5)
Sometimes, you may have to modify the number rolled on the dice (or 'on the roll'). This is noted as D6 plus or minus a number, such as D6+1. Roll the dice and add or subtract the number given to or from the roll (as appropriate) to get the final result. For example, D6+2 means roll a dice and add 2 to the number on the dice for a total between 3 and 8. You may also be told to roll a number of dice... etc.

WOLF STANDARD (SW Codex, p. 62)
...For the duration of the next Assault Phase, all models in that unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1.


Please pay attention to the wording of the Modifying Dice Rolls section. It clearly defines and demonstrates the difference between the "roll" and the "final result": the roll is prior to the modifier, whereas the final result is after the modifier.

Now look at the wording of the Wolf Standard. it states that a unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1. It says rolls. It does NOT say "results of a 1".

Because the Wolf Standard allows the player to re-roll the ROLLS of a 1 (as opposed to the RESULT of a 1), the player definitely CAN use the Wolf Standard on Mark of the Wulfen.



I will also point out that this reasoning makes use only of the two directly relevant rules sections.

Does the Wolf standard specify "a natural roll of a 1"?

If not then it is the modified roll.

DeathReaper, you are just inventing your own rules now. At no point in the Modifying Dice Rolls section does anything reference the term "natural roll"; however, the example given which supports me is even D6+1, the very same modifier we are debating.

You can obstinately deny this all you want, but you're going to have to actually use citations that directly apply to the rules in question. I've even taken the time to copy out the two relevant rules for you. Unless you can do that, enjoy holding your breathe and pouting while everyone else re-rolls for Mark of the Wulfen.




Anyway, I've proven that you can use the Wolf Standard on Mark of the Wulfen, hung around to wait for any real counter-arguments, and I see there are none. So my work here is done.

Here is your citation:

The reserve rules say: "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124

Here is the proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll.

You have not proven anything, as my rules quote shows the flaw in your argument.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Here is your citation:

The reserve rules say: "Regardless of the modifier(s), a natural roll of a 1 always means that the unit in question remains in reserve." P.124

Here is the proof that modifiers are a part of the dice roll.

You have not proven anything, as my rules quote shows the flaw in your argument.

Sorry DR his makes perfect sense. In the case of the Reserves rules it appears they were just overclarifying things.
Argue it all you like.

However In the quote you have There's no such thing as a natural 1 regardless of modifiers. As the result of a die roll in your opinion is Dice+Modifier='s Dice roll.

3rd try, swing and a miss.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The proof modifiers aren't part of the dice roll is on page 5.