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.

 Neferhet wrote:
On the same note, the rules states that you cannot reroll any dice more than once (pag 178, upper left). It also does not specifies "during the current game", so i should assume that i cannon EVER-FOREVER reroll an individual dice more than once.

Let's say i have 3 dice: X red, X white and X black.

As per RAW i can only re-roll my X white dice once, my X black dice once and my X red dice once.

After that i'd better buy another 3, called Y white, Y black and Y red. Because X dices cannot be rerolled ANYMORE in any given game until i die.

Do you guys think we need a faq for this too, or maybe, just maybe, warhammer has become the standard hobby for lawyers?

The answer to OP is "No". And i totally get that in other games a "Yes" would be perfectly logical. In warhammer it is not.

This is such a weird post. You come out and admit at the end that, actually, yeah, this is a totally plausible gameplay mechanic and if the rulebook said "Schmarhammer 40k" on the front then maybe it would even be the right reading of the rules, but right up until then you're straw-manning it as an utterly preposterous reading that nobody could possibly think was intended. So I'm not sure how to respond because you've already managed to refute your own post quite effectively, but to make the connection explicit: not everyone is going to have your complex and nuanced understanding of the traditions and history of Warhammer 40k that enables them to find a prohibition on re-rolling your opponent's dice in the penumbras and emanations of this and past rulebooks. It is completely plausible that if a group of people decided to start learning this game, they would eventually come to the conclusion that re-rolling an opponent's dice is not just RAW legal but is actually intended.

But, yes, apparently this has become the standard hobby for lawyers. In this thread alone we've had several people bizarrely arguing that it is definitionally impossible to re-roll a die that you yourself did not roll originally, contrary to extremely common English usage. There's lots of very weird "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'again' is". And now you're coming in saying that not only is the plain reading of the rules, which you admit only allows something that is a perfectly plausible sort of gameplay mechanic and would be the right reading for many other games, wrong, it's so obviously wrong that it does not even need clarification. You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.

Dionysodorus wrote:

You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.

Yes, your honour. I will relax. But remember that maximalist case questions begets maximalist case answers.

Anyway it's the old RAI vs RAW.

Should GW learn to write proper rules? Yes, they should.
Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please.

Otherwise, seriously, any singular dice can be re rolled just once in a lifetime. And all our Peanut Butter jars should really be labeled "may contain peanut".

I think, collectively, we all need to take a nap.

 Neferhet wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.

Yes, your honour. I will relax. But remember that maximalist case questions begets maximalist case answers.

Anyway it's the old RAI vs RAW.

Should GW learn to write proper rules? Yes, they should.
Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please.

Otherwise, seriously, any singular dice can be re rolled just once in a lifetime. And all our Peanut Butter jars should really be labeled "may contain peanut".

"Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please."

What does this even mean? The rules should be pretty tight. If they give us a general permission to re-roll a die, but don't expressly prevent us from re-rolling an opponent's die, we should assume that we can re-roll an opponent's die. There shouldn't be any unwritten assumptions about what we can and can't do. How would a new player, who has never played any prior edition of Warhammer 40k, know that he or she can't re-roll an opponent's die? If that's the author's intent, it needs to be spelled out, unambiguously in the rules. It doesn't appear to be in this case.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Neferhet wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.

Yes, your honour. I will relax. But remember that maximalist case questions begets maximalist case answers.

Anyway it's the old RAI vs RAW.

Should GW learn to write proper rules? Yes, they should.
Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please.

Otherwise, seriously, any singular dice can be re rolled just once in a lifetime. And all our Peanut Butter jars should really be labeled "may contain peanut".

"Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please."

What does this even mean? The rules should be pretty tight. If they give us a general permission to re-roll a die, but don't expressly prevent us from re-rolling an opponent's die, we should assume that we can re-roll an opponent's die. There shouldn't be any unwritten assumptions about what we can and can't do. How would a new player, who has never played any prior edition of Warhammer 40k, know that he or she can't re-roll an opponent's die? If that's the author's intent, it needs to be spelled out, unambiguously in the rules. It doesn't appear to be in this case.

Yes but you do not ever Re-roll an opponents die. No game allows this. You can force your opponent to reroll...successful saves etc. But you aren't the one who rerolls it therefore you cannot use a CP to reroll an opponents dice roll

mhalko1 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 Neferhet wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

You can relax, counsellor; you don't have to make such an implausibly maximalist case in defense of your client.

Yes, your honour. I will relax. But remember that maximalist case questions begets maximalist case answers.

Anyway it's the old RAI vs RAW.

Should GW learn to write proper rules? Yes, they should.
Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please.

Otherwise, seriously, any singular dice can be re rolled just once in a lifetime. And all our Peanut Butter jars should really be labeled "may contain peanut".

"Should we stop nitpicking rules like it was a binding contract, where a clause not expressly denied is allowed? Yes, please."

What does this even mean? The rules should be pretty tight. If they give us a general permission to re-roll a die, but don't expressly prevent us from re-rolling an opponent's die, we should assume that we can re-roll an opponent's die. There shouldn't be any unwritten assumptions about what we can and can't do. How would a new player, who has never played any prior edition of Warhammer 40k, know that he or she can't re-roll an opponent's die? If that's the author's intent, it needs to be spelled out, unambiguously in the rules. It doesn't appear to be in this case.

Yes but you do not ever Re-roll an opponents die. No game allows this. You can force your opponent to reroll...successful saves etc. But you aren't the one who rerolls it therefore you cannot use a CP to reroll an opponents dice roll

Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false. Historically, Warhammer 40k hasn't allowed it, but this is a new edition, so "how we always done things" isn't a great reason for anything. Off the top of my head, Star Wars Destiny is a current game where game effects allow you to pick up an opponent's die and re-roll it. Common courtesy dictates that you ask your opponent to re-roll his own die, but the rules allow you to.

 Kriswall wrote:
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.

Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.

Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.

I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.

At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.

If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.

Mage: The Ascension/Awakening Fate spells can force rerolls on any dice among other things.

 Kriswall wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.

Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.

I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.

At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.

If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.

How does SW Destiny make clear that it includes your opponent's dice? Does it say so, or has it been an assumption?

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.

Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.

I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.

At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.

If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.

How does SW Destiny make clear that it includes your opponent's dice? Does it say so, or has it been an assumption?

It is definitely not an assumption. The rules are freely available on the manufacturer's website should you wish to have specifics. To paraphrase, the game uses "your die" or "an opponent's die" when it matters and "a die" when you can pick either.

 Kriswall wrote:


Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false. Historically, Warhammer 40k hasn't allowed it, but this is a new edition, so "how we always done things" isn't a great reason for anything. Off the top of my head, Star Wars Destiny is a current game where game effects allow you to pick up an opponent's die and re-roll it. Common courtesy dictates that you ask your opponent to re-roll his own die, but the rules allow you to.

That is not what your claiming. Your claiming that you can reach over and physically pick up the opponents die roll and roll it yourself, taking that result. Again, "you can reroll" requires "you" to be part of the process.

 Kriswall wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.

Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.

I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.

At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.

If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.

How does SW Destiny make clear that it includes your opponent's dice? Does it say so, or has it been an assumption?

It is definitely not an assumption. The rules are freely available on the manufacturer's website should you wish to have specifics. To paraphrase, the game uses "your die" or "an opponent's die" when it matters and "a die" when you can pick either.

So, basically they do specifically differentiate in their rules between rerolling your own die and rerolling opponent's dice,or "a" die for it being either side. Since GW hasn't worded it that way, why would you assume it would be the same as a game where they have made this differentiation? Esepcially, as Fragile points out, "you" don't normally get to reach over and roll opponent's dice. "You" don't get to reroll dice "you" don't get to roll the first time - that's never specified in the GW rules as being allowed.

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false.

Can you name 3 games that do this without it specifying "Opponent's die" or something similar, where reroll "a" die applies to the opponent? You've been repeating this claim, and I'm curious as to which games fall in the "lots" category.

I don't have every rule book for every game I've ever played memorized. Off the top of my head, I know that SW Destiny says "a die" and includes your opponent's dice. There are others, but again, I don't have rule books memorized.

At the end of the day, I don't need to prove my claim as it's really only anecdotal evidence... which doesn't mean much. My whole point is that there is no gaming industry wide, etched in stone rule that prevents you from ever re-rolling an opponent's die. Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It says I can re-roll a die. I see no restriction that "a die" must by "your die". Unless you can show such a restriction via rules text, it's not there and I can re-roll whatever I want.

If the authors clarify their intent via FAQ or Errata, we'll all have the answer. I suspect they don't want you to re-roll an opponent's die, but that's not what they wrote. GW has a history of being bad at translating intent to unambiguous rules text.

How does SW Destiny make clear that it includes your opponent's dice? Does it say so, or has it been an assumption?

It is definitely not an assumption. The rules are freely available on the manufacturer's website should you wish to have specifics. To paraphrase, the game uses "your die" or "an opponent's die" when it matters and "a die" when you can pick either.

So, basically they do specifically differentiate in their rules between rerolling your own die and rerolling opponent's dice,or "a" die for it being either side. Since GW hasn't worded it that way, why would you assume it would be the same as a game where they have made this differentiation? Esepcially, as Fragile points out, "you" don't normally get to reach over and roll opponent's dice. "You" don't get to reroll dice "you" don't get to roll the first time - that's never specified in the GW rules as being allowed.

Legitimately asking... if GW doesn't specify, why do you assume "a die" only covers the subset of "your dice"? Why doesn't "a die" include all dice? Confirmation bias?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fragile wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:


Lots of games allow you to re-roll an opponent's die. Your assertion is false. Historically, Warhammer 40k hasn't allowed it, but this is a new edition, so "how we always done things" isn't a great reason for anything. Off the top of my head, Star Wars Destiny is a current game where game effects allow you to pick up an opponent's die and re-roll it. Common courtesy dictates that you ask your opponent to re-roll his own die, but the rules allow you to.

That is not what your claiming. Your claiming that you can reach over and physically pick up the opponents die roll and roll it yourself, taking that result. Again, "you can reroll" requires "you" to be part of the process.

In Destiny, you can literally reach over and physically pick up the opponent's die and re-roll it yourself, creating a new result. I think most people ask the opponent to re-roll the die out of common courtesy and a commonly held gamer belief that it's impolite to touch another gamer's stuff.

Not specifically about dice rerolling, but in MTG it's assumed that unless it says "your (item)" or "opponent's (item)", you're free to choose whichever one as long as it fulfills the rest of the requirements (such as "destroy target land". You are totally free to destroy either an opponent's land or your own, if doing so would be beneficial) so I can see how some people can be acclimated to it.

Still though GW's dice rolls have traditionally been assigned ownership and outside of Kairos's ability, I don't think there were any instances where you could reroll an opponent's dice without explicit permission due to the way it was written (they always specified specific dice rolls, like Armor Saves or To Hit rolls of certain models, which did have ownership. You couldn't use Guide or something similar to force your opponent's units to reroll To Hit since you couldn't even target them with the effect).

 Kriswall wrote:


Legitimately asking... if GW doesn't specify, why do you assume "a die" only covers the subset of "your dice"? Why doesn't "a die" include all dice? Confirmation bias?

More specifically, why would "Reroll any one dice" (the actual wording in the rule) exclude any of the dice?

 doctortom wrote:

So, basically they do specifically differentiate in their rules between rerolling your own die and rerolling opponent's dice,or "a" die for it being either side. Since GW hasn't worded it that way, why would you assume it would be the same as a game where they have made this differentiation? Esepcially, as Fragile points out, "you" don't normally get to reach over and roll opponent's dice. "You" don't get to reroll dice "you" don't get to roll the first time - that's never specified in the GW rules as being allowed.

I just glanced at the Destiny rules and I actually don't see any discussion of re-rolls, though I may have missed it. The rules are extremely brief and it seems like mostly they expect you to just follow card text. Some cards say that you can re-roll "a die" or similar. Apparently people play that as you can re-roll an opponent's dice.

Regardless, this whole tangent seems pretty silly. I am not sure what point you're driving at. Like, let's stipulate that while maybe there are other games that let you re-roll other people's dice all of them say explicitly in their rules that you're allowed to re-roll other people's dice. So? I think that mostly everyone agrees that it is very unlikely that GW intends for players to re-roll other players' dice. The position of the people you're trying to disagree with is, by and large I think, that by the RAW it's clearly legal to re-roll your opponent's dice and that some not-vanishingly-small number of (perhaps mostly new) players will not correctly divine the intent of the rules such that a clarification would be useful. I mean, I just think that when we're at the point where you're arguing about whether other games are explicit about their allowance of this mechanic that everyone's conceded isn't a crazy one, or whether there's some fundamental difference between you re-rolling your opponent's dice and you allowing your opponent to re-roll his dice that you're technically allowed to re-roll yourself, you've given the game away. Right? If it is reasonably possible for players to come to 40k without some really firm expectation that they can never re-roll their opponent's dice, it's worth clarifying if the rules were not supposed to actually allow it.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

So, basically they do specifically differentiate in their rules between rerolling your own die and rerolling opponent's dice,or "a" die for it being either side. Since GW hasn't worded it that way, why would you assume it would be the same as a game where they have made this differentiation? Esepcially, as Fragile points out, "you" don't normally get to reach over and roll opponent's dice. "You" don't get to reroll dice "you" don't get to roll the first time - that's never specified in the GW rules as being allowed.

I just glanced at the Destiny rules and I actually don't see any discussion of re-rolls, though I may have missed it. The rules are extremely brief and it seems like mostly they expect you to just follow card text. Some cards say that you can re-roll "a die" or similar. Apparently people play that as you can re-roll an opponent's dice.

Regardless, this whole tangent seems pretty silly. I am not sure what point you're driving at. Like, let's stipulate that while maybe there are other games that let you re-roll other people's dice all of them say explicitly in their rules that you're allowed to re-roll other people's dice. So? I think that mostly everyone agrees that it is very unlikely that GW intends for players to re-roll other players' dice. The position of the people you're trying to disagree with is, by and large I think, that by the RAW it's clearly legal to re-roll your opponent's dice and that some not-vanishingly-small number of (perhaps mostly new) players will not correctly divine the intent of the rules such that a clarification would be useful. I mean, I just think that when we're at the point where you're arguing about whether other games are explicit about their allowance of this mechanic that everyone's conceded isn't a crazy one, or whether there's some fundamental difference between you re-rolling your opponent's dice and you allowing your opponent to re-roll his dice that you're technically allowed to re-roll yourself, you've given the game away. Right? If it is reasonably possible for players to come to 40k without some really firm expectation that they can never re-roll their opponent's dice, it's worth clarifying if the rules were not supposed to actually allow it.

Right. If GW's wants us to only be able to re-roll our own dice, they need to say so explicitly. It's as simple as that. This can be cleared up with a simple FAQ. "Q: Can such and such command point ability let me re-roll an opponent's die? A: No". Or yes. Whatever they say. My money is on no.

 Kriswall wrote:


Legitimately asking... if GW doesn't specify, why do you assume "a die" only covers the subset of "your dice"? Why doesn't "a die" include all dice? Confirmation bias?

Because you don't roll opponent's dice, only your own, and you don't reroll dice you haven't rolled in the first place. You'd need to specify you getting to roll or reroll opponent's dice, which the rules do not do.

 Kriswall wrote:



In Destiny, you can literally reach over and physically pick up the opponent's die and re-roll it yourself, creating a new result. I think most people ask the opponent to re-roll the die out of common courtesy and a commonly held gamer belief that it's impolite to touch another gamer's stuff.

Because their rules specifically indicate when you can roll oppoent's dice. Unlike 40k.

 doctortom wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:


Legitimately asking... if GW doesn't specify, why do you assume "a die" only covers the subset of "your dice"? Why doesn't "a die" include all dice? Confirmation bias?

Because you don't roll opponent's dice, only your own, and you don't reroll dice you haven't rolled in the first place. You'd need to specify you getting to roll or reroll opponent's dice, which the rules do not do.

 Kriswall wrote:



In Destiny, you can literally reach over and physically pick up the opponent's die and re-roll it yourself, creating a new result. I think most people ask the opponent to re-roll the die out of common courtesy and a commonly held gamer belief that it's impolite to touch another gamer's stuff.

Because their rules specifically indicate when you can roll oppoent's dice. Unlike 40k.

Your first point is tenuous at best. Common English usage allows you to redo something you didn't do in the first place. You can rebuild a house you didn't initially build. You can refill a glass for a friend despite not being the one to fill it the first time. You can reroll a die somebody else rolled the first time.

Then again, I guess when the argument comes down to basic language comprehension, nobody wins. We need to wait for an FAQ, which I fully expect will tell us we can only reroll our own dice. I just don't think GW will ever be good at writing unambiguous rules.

RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."

Alcibiades wrote:
RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."

I think for the sake of RAI good sportsmanship there will be a resounding lack of anything but re-rolling one's own d6

 Aetare wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."

I think for the sake of RAI good sportsmanship there will be a resounding lack of anything but re-rolling one's own d6

I think you're completely correct!

Alcibiades wrote:

 Aetare wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."

I think for the sake of RAI good sportsmanship there will be a resounding lack of anything but re-rolling one's own d6

I think you're completely correct!

I'm just not convinced that it's RAI. We need the authors to opine. As mentioned several times, rolling an opponent's die is definitely a thing that happens in games these days. It's nowhere near a universal gaming taboo. RAW clearly allows it. This is definitely something that needs to be FAQ'd.

 Kriswall wrote:
Right. If GW's wants us to only be able to re-roll our own dice, they need to say so explicitly. It's as simple as that. This can be cleared up with a simple FAQ. "Q: Can such and such command point ability let me re-roll an opponent's die? A: No". Or yes. Whatever they say. My money is on no.

Why would they need to make a FAQ when it is already specified in the rerolls rule:

"Re-rolls: Some rules allow YOU to re-roll a dice roll, which means YOU get to roll some or all of the dice again. YOU can never re-roll a dice more than once, and re-rolls happen before any modifiers (if any) are applied."

Capitalized YOU for clarity. Since this rule as a whole refers only to "you" this is a single entity (as in 1 person). As such YOU cannot reroll a dice I rolled.

DutchSage wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Right. If GW's wants us to only be able to re-roll our own dice, they need to say so explicitly. It's as simple as that. This can be cleared up with a simple FAQ. "Q: Can such and such command point ability let me re-roll an opponent's die? A: No". Or yes. Whatever they say. My money is on no.

Why would they need to make a FAQ when it is already specified in the rerolls rule:

"Re-rolls: Some rules allow YOU to re-roll a dice roll, which means YOU get to roll some or all of the dice again. YOU can never re-roll a dice more than once, and re-rolls happen before any modifiers (if any) are applied."

Capitalized YOU for clarity. Since this rule as a whole refers only to "you" this is a single entity (as in 1 person). As such YOU cannot reroll a dice I rolled.

As has been mentioned multiple times in this thread, it is common English usage to allow a person to RE-whatever something they didn't whatever in the first place. I can rebuild a house that someone else built after a natural disaster damages it. Survey 1000 people and the overwhelming majority would say, "yeah, Kris rebuilt that house". Assuming that a person can re-whatever something they didn't whatever in the first place (again, common English usage), nothing in the above cited rule prevents me from re-rolling an opponent's die after s/he rolled it the first time.

However using your rebuilding a house argument as a rule:

"Rebuilding: Some rules allow YOU to rebuild a house, which means YOU get to build some or all of the house again. YOU can never rebuild a house more than once"

How can you claim that you can rebuild your opponents house with that rule? It's not about the RE-whatever, it's about the YOU.

So while it is possible to RE-whatever (English usage, common or not), the fact that it states YOU limits it to YOU doing it and not someone else. If for some reason common English usage allows someone else to do something YOU are allowed to do I reckon a lot of students would let someone else redo the exams they failed .

Alcibiades wrote:
RAW, you can not only reroll your opponent's dice, but the dice of people on the other side of the room, nay, the dice of people on the other side of the world playing Monopoly, In fact, you can reroll a die that you rolled in a game of Monopoly when you were 10 years old. Because it just says "a die" -- not even specified as "in your current game of Warhammer 40K."

RAW none of those dice can be rerolled after one reroll, so once that die has been rolled twice you have to dicard it since it can't be (re)rolled any more.

DutchSage wrote:
However using your rebuilding a house argument as a rule:

"Rebuilding: Some rules allow YOU to rebuild a house, which means YOU get to build some or all of the house again. YOU can never rebuild a house more than once"

How can you claim that you can rebuild your opponents house with that rule? It's not about the RE-whatever, it's about the YOU.

So while it is possible to RE-whatever (English usage, common or not), the fact that it states YOU limits it to YOU doing it and not someone else. If for some reason common English usage allows someone else to do something YOU are allowed to do I reckon a lot of students would let someone else redo the exams they failed .

This does not appear to be an actual reply to the person's post. I think you misunderstood something. His position is not just that it is in general possible to re-[verb].

DutchSage wrote:
However using your rebuilding a house argument as a rule:

"Rebuilding: Some rules allow YOU to rebuild a house, which means YOU get to build some or all of the house again. YOU can never rebuild a house more than once"

How can you claim that you can rebuild your opponents house with that rule? It's not about the RE-whatever, it's about the YOU.

So while it is possible to RE-whatever (English usage, common or not), the fact that it states YOU limits it to YOU doing it and not someone else. If for some reason common English usage allows someone else to do something YOU are allowed to do I reckon a lot of students would let someone else redo the exams they failed .

"Some rules allow you to rebuild A house, ..."

Why do you interpret "A house" as "YOUR house"? I'm not adding rules here. You are. I'm just saying that my opponent's house is "A house".