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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Where does it say that Dark Reapers ONLY hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers?

It doesn't. It just says they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

Is a 2 or a 1 without modification a 3+?

Saying they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers is not the same as saying they only hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

One precludes hitting on a 2 (with modifiers). The other does not.

 Happyjew wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Where does it say that Dark Reapers ONLY hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers?

It doesn't. It just says they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

Is a 2 or a 1 without modification a 3+?

Saying they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers is not the same as saying they only hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

One precludes hitting on a 2 (with modifiers). The other does not.

And how are you hitting on a 2 while simultaneously disregarding modifiers?

 Happyjew wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Where does it say that Dark Reapers ONLY hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers?

It doesn't. It just says they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

Is a 2 or a 1 without modification a 3+?

Saying they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers is not the same as saying they only hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

One precludes hitting on a 2 (with modifiers). The other does not.

Actually, it is the same. You hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers. Modifiers can be positive or negative. Therefore, you disregard the positive as well as the negative modifiers for hitting on a 3+. So, even with a +1 you hit on a 3+.

I see what Happy is saying, but I think he's being a little semantic.

Does a model with a BS of 3+ hit on a 4+? Very technically, yes. He would hit on the roll of a 4, 5 or 6. HOWEVER, we would generally never say that the model hits on a 4+. We'd say he hits on a 3+. This sort of context is important.

Saying that a model hits on a 3+, regardless of modifiers would generally be interpreted as 1 and 2 being a fail with 3, 4, 5 and 6 being a success. I'd bet that this is the intent. They don't expect us to play semantic games to draw generally counter-intuitive conclusions. I say counter-intuitive because most models that hit on a 3+ DON'T hit on a 2.

The proper terminology to get the effect Happy is thinking about would be "Always hits on a roll of 3 or better" or ".. on a 3+ or better".

Technically, RAW, there is some ambiguity. However, a 3+ isn't the same thing as "a 3 or better". "[N]+" is a game term meaning a roll on a D6 where an N or higher is a pass, anything lower is a failure.

I think RAW is clear enough for most purposes, but an argument could be made.

 doctortom wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Where does it say that Dark Reapers ONLY hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers?

It doesn't. It just says they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

Is a 2 or a 1 without modification a 3+?

Saying they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers is not the same as saying they only hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

One precludes hitting on a 2 (with modifiers). The other does not.

Actually, it is the same. You hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers. Modifiers can be positive or negative. Therefore, you disregard the positive as well as the negative modifiers for hitting on a 3+. So, even with a +1 you hit on a 3+.

Except it's not.

Hitting on a 3+ regardless of modifiers means that if you roll a natural 3+ (no matter what modifiers you have) you hit. This has no effect on rolling a 2 with a +1 modifier. All it is saying is if it modifiers make the result less than 3, if you rolled a 3+ you hit.

Hitting on only a 3+ regardless of modifiers means that you must roll a natural 3+ in order to hit.

You are arguing semantics with incomplete verbiage.

This is foolish.

"Models in this unit always hit on a 3+ when firing a ranged weapon in the Shooting Phase, regardless of any modifiers."

Any modifiers, Positive or negative, are not regarded for determining whether you hit in the shooting phase.

So rolling a 2 on a shooting attack with a +1 to hit, disregards the +1 to hit.

So I think there is a PathFinder Strategem that say the unit is ONLY hit on a 6. Reapers always hit on 3+.

So who wins here if Reapers are shooting Pathfinders?

 admironheart wrote:
So I think there is a PathFinder Strategem that say the unit is ONLY hit on a 6. Reapers always hit on 3+.

So who wins here if Reapers are shooting Pathfinders?

AH, A real question.

Pathfinders wins out do to sequencing.

Pathfinders is used at the beginning of the Reaper's shooting phase, defining a 6 to hit for the phase; Reaper's Accuracy takes effect when firing in their shooting phase.

 admironheart wrote:
So I think there is a PathFinder Strategem that say the unit is ONLY hit on a 6. Reapers always hit on 3+.

So who wins here if Reapers are shooting Pathfinders?

Normally i'd say roll off on this case.

Dark reapers ALWAYS hit on 3+, and the pathfinders are ONLY hit on 6+. The two wordings seem equal in strength. The pathfinder stratagem isn't modifying the dark reapers roll though, its just stating they can ONLY be hit by rolls of a 6+. This would actually beat out the inescapable accuracy wording if you think about it. In this case the dark reapers would benefit from +1 to hit though as it would make their 5's into 6's and hit the pathfinders.


Not to mention your paying CP on the strat so its gonna override normal abilities in terms of strength.

 Happyjew wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Where does it say that Dark Reapers ONLY hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers?

It doesn't. It just says they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

Is a 2 or a 1 without modification a 3+?

Saying they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers is not the same as saying they only hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

One precludes hitting on a 2 (with modifiers). The other does not.

Actually, it is the same. You hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers. Modifiers can be positive or negative. Therefore, you disregard the positive as well as the negative modifiers for hitting on a 3+. So, even with a +1 you hit on a 3+.

Except it's not.

Hitting on a 3+ regardless of modifiers means that if you roll a natural 3+ (no matter what modifiers you have) you hit. This has no effect on rolling a 2 with a +1 modifier. All it is saying is if it modifiers make the result less than 3, if you rolled a 3+ you hit.

Hitting on only a 3+ regardless of modifiers means that you must roll a natural 3+ in order to hit.

How did you disregard any modifier if you added +1?

 Happyjew wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Where does it say that Dark Reapers ONLY hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers?

It doesn't. It just says they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

Is a 2 or a 1 without modification a 3+?

Saying they hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers is not the same as saying they only hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

One precludes hitting on a 2 (with modifiers). The other does not.

Actually, it is the same. You hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers. Modifiers can be positive or negative. Therefore, you disregard the positive as well as the negative modifiers for hitting on a 3+. So, even with a +1 you hit on a 3+.

Except it's not.

Hitting on a 3+ regardless of modifiers means that if you roll a natural 3+ (no matter what modifiers you have) you hit.

That is correct.

 Happyjew wrote:
This has no effect on rolling a 2 with a +1 modifier.

that is not correct. Going back to the statement you hit on a 3+ regardless of modifiers - you roll a 2. You have a +1. You don't hit because you hit on 3+ regardless of modifiers. You admit the +1 is a modifier, so you ignore it.

 Happyjew wrote:
All it is saying is if it modifiers make the result less than 3, if you rolled a 3+ you hit.

No, it is saying to ignore modifiers It does not say regardless of negative modifiers, it says regardless of modifiers. . That means you ignore positive as well as negative modifiers. If you claim you can hit on a 2+, then you are not doing it regardless of modifiers.