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, err I realized I've been played wrong with my firends the whole time cause apparently modifiers apply after re-rolls.
So I get that for example, if you have a 3+BS, a -1 to hit and a buff that allows you to re-roll everything, if you roll a natural 3, you can not re-roll it cause at the time of the reroll it's still a would-be hit with your BS3+, okay.

Now let's say you have a +1 to hit instead and you chose to re-roll some 1s, dou you HAVE to also re-roll the 2s even if you know they are gonna become 3s and hit.

tl;dr when you use re-roll buffs can you choose to re-roll some dice and some not?

The rule will say if it is optional or compulsory.

For some it's clear, like Roboute: "XIII Primarch: You can re-roll any failed hit and wound rolls for friendly ULTRAMARINES units within 6" of Roboute Guilliman." okay,

but how about Marneus Calgar: "You can re-roll failed hit rolls for friendly ULTRAMARINES units within 6" of Marneus Calgar.", it doesn't say "all" but it doesn't say "any" either, so how is it?

Can is not must. It's optional.

I get that, but it's not clear if you can re-roll SOME failed hit rolls and some not.

If so, why didn't they add "any" like in the Roboute Guilliman text? What's the difference between the two rules I quoted?

I think see what you mean. As hit rolls are normally performed one at a time i dont think it's an issue.

Technically all hit rolls should be done one at a time, so it's a moot point as to whether you can choose to re-roll some of them, because technically you can.

If it says "Can", it's optional. If it says "must" or doesn't say "can" (like Seraphim's Save Re-roll, see my sig for that sillyness) then it's compulsory.

Even hit rolls from a single model with multiple attacks on the profile?

macluvin wrote:
Even hit rolls from a single model with multiple attacks on the profile?

Yes.

Also I think the whole mods after rerolls thing is a terrible idea. I would house rule that out.

macluvin wrote:
Also I think the whole mods after rerolls thing is a terrible idea. I would house rule that out.

Then you're making -1 to hit a benefit to the enemy if they have rerolls of 1's.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

macluvin wrote:
Also I think the whole mods after rerolls thing is a terrible idea. I would house rule that out.

Then you're making -1 to hit a benefit to the enemy if they have rerolls of 1's.

Except the math doesn't bear that out. (Not to mention he could just rule that "reroll 1s" only applies to NATURAL 1s.)

There is no situation where, if you reroll 1s, -X ever INCREASES your chances of succeeding, even if you get to reroll more.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

macluvin wrote:
Also I think the whole mods after rerolls thing is a terrible idea. I would house rule that out.

Then you're making -1 to hit a benefit to the enemy if they have rerolls of 1's.

Except the math doesn't bear that out. (Not to mention he could just rule that "reroll 1s" only applies to NATURAL 1s.)

There is no situation where, if you reroll 1s, -X ever INCREASES your chances of succeeding, even if you get to reroll more.

Even if the maths doesn't pan out, the appearance is important too. It would just "feel" bad for your opponent to sometimes get a benefit from what was supposed to be a negative. This is especially true for BS3+ models, because you now get to re-roll 1's AND 2's.

It's like when World of Warcraft implemented a EXP penalty if you played for too long. People got upset because they were being penalised. So they instead made it a bonus to EXP if you took breaks, while lowering the base EXP gain. Same exact result, far different reception. https://mmogrinder.net/2014/11/25/the-truth-about-rested-xp/

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

macluvin wrote:
Also I think the whole mods after rerolls thing is a terrible idea. I would house rule that out.

Then you're making -1 to hit a benefit to the enemy if they have rerolls of 1's.

Except the math doesn't bear that out. (Not to mention he could just rule that "reroll 1s" only applies to NATURAL 1s.)

There is no situation where, if you reroll 1s, -X ever INCREASES your chances of succeeding, even if you get to reroll more.

Even if the maths doesn't pan out, the appearance is important too. It would just "feel" bad for your opponent to sometimes get a benefit from what was supposed to be a negative. This is especially true for BS3+ models, because you now get to re-roll 1's AND 2's.

And you miss on 3s.

Again-if you're gonna start houseruling, you might as well add "Natural 1s only" to the reroll 1s clause.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

macluvin wrote:
Also I think the whole mods after rerolls thing is a terrible idea. I would house rule that out.

Then you're making -1 to hit a benefit to the enemy if they have rerolls of 1's.

Not really, because their natural ones are zeros (you know, 1-1=0). So they still get the same amount of rerolls.

Spetulhu wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

macluvin wrote:
Also I think the whole mods after rerolls thing is a terrible idea. I would house rule that out.

Then you're making -1 to hit a benefit to the enemy if they have rerolls of 1's.

Not really, because their natural ones are zeros (you know, 1-1=0). So they still get the same amount of rerolls.

From the Designer's Commentary:

Q: Can a dice roll ever be modified to less than 1?

A: No. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less than 1, count that result as a 1.

The designer commentary is made with the current rules. If you changed the current rules (modefiers after re-rolls) then the designers commentary would have to be different if they wanted to keep the same resolt.

As for the commentary, do they by any chance say the same for rolling high ie is everything over six regarded as a six? I do so want to face "extra hits or other effect on a six to hit" abilities or weapons that actually get the benefit on 5-6 or 4-6. But maybe some of those were written to include the limitation of natural six?

Usually they rule state something like a roll of 6+. So after modefiers that can be 5 or even 4. Necrons Teslas benefit of this, and also Old One Eye, among many.

Likevice, plasma guns do not like -1 to hit.

Spetulhu wrote:
As for the commentary, do they by any chance say the same for rolling high ie is everything over six regarded as a six? I do so want to face "extra hits or other effect on a six to hit" abilities or weapons that actually get the benefit on 5-6 or 4-6. But maybe some of those were written to include the limitation of natural six?

No, a result of 6+1 is still a 7. However any rule that happens on 6's is always written as "6+", so 7s work also.

Keep in mind that some things have a save of 7+, which couldn't work if they capped it at 6.