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.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Ok. Find the mechanical consequence in my above example. As I said: this isnt a universal thing. Literally everyone has admitted that it should only be done when A) it will be exactly the same as rolling them individually and B) when your opponent consents. But when it *can* be done, there's no mechanical advantage in doing so. The only advantage is that the game moves more quickly.

We've already given multiple examples of why it makes a difference. Say you're blocking a pathway though terrain, and also on an objective.

Give it up. Accept that when it makes no difference shortcuts are fine. Everyone proposing shortcuts is saying that when it matters you can’t shortcut, so as not to affect the game. Stop making threads about you... honestly.

No one is claiming Fast Rolling FNP-alikes is RAW.

People are claiming Fast Rolling FNP-alikes is HIWPI.

BCB is, as always, conflating that with breaking all the rules of the game at the same time.

Can we lock this thread and move on?

Yes. But does it make a difference *every time*? You have this argument that it *always* makes a difference. And you're either living in a fantasy world, or are outright ignoring reality to enforce your point.

One more time, this time with feeling:

You should not fast roll FnPs in every situation. Instead, you and your opponent should look at what's going on and agree on whether or not fast rolling those dice is okay in the context of that particular situation.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Just seems like one of those things you should ask about before rolling. "Hey buddy, you mind if I fast roll these FNPs?" "Sure, no problem."

So, would you also say "No Problem" if I said "Hey buddy, I'm just going to assume all my rolls to hit pass?" If not, you're being hypocritical.

How is that hypocritical. If you ask if you can do it and the opponent says "no", then you don't do it.

I am saying that ignoring one rule but enforcing another is hypocritical. Either all rules should be followed, or none of them should IMHO, there is no middle ground.

There's always a middle ground with house rules. Asking someone if they mind if you do something is establishing a house rule if the opponent agrees. There is absolutely nothing hypocritical about choosing to enact house rules that are agreed upon. Get off your high horse.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Ok. Find the mechanical consequence in my above example. As I said: this isnt a universal thing. Literally everyone has admitted that it should only be done when A) it will be exactly the same as rolling them individually and B) when your opponent consents. But when it *can* be done, there's no mechanical advantage in doing so. The only advantage is that the game moves more quickly.

We've already given multiple examples of why it makes a difference. Say you're blocking a pathway though terrain, and also on an objective.

So you're not actually reading the points you're replying to now. The question was about the mechanical differences in a specific example, not the general case.

Everyone here is aware there are times that rolling individually matters. That isn't even a debate, so why do you keep acting as if it is?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the basic argument is: because you can't always fast roll FnPs, you should never fast roll them. Which, to me, sounds like saying: because you can't always fast roll Hit Rolls (because of varying weapon profiles in a unit), you should never fast roll them. Which is, obviously, ridiculous.

 flandarz wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the basic argument is: because you can't always fast roll FnPs, you should never fast roll them. Which, to me, sounds like saying: because you can't always fast roll Hit Rolls (because of varying weapon profiles in a unit), you should never fast roll them. Which is, obviously, ridiculous.

RAW, you can't fast roll FnP. You and your opponent may agree to house rule it for the sake of saving time, but it's just that - a house rule.

We're not telling you you can;t play the game the way you play the game. We're discussing the strict letter of rule.

 skchsan wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the basic argument is: because you can't always fast roll FnPs, you should never fast roll them. Which, to me, sounds like saying: because you can't always fast roll Hit Rolls (because of varying weapon profiles in a unit), you should never fast roll them. Which is, obviously, ridiculous.

RAW, you can't fast roll FnP. You and your opponent may agree to house rule it for the sake of saving time, but it's just that - a house rule.

Literally everyone is aware of this, and that's how it's being presented. Did you even read all the responses before replying?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skchsan wrote:


We're not telling you you can;t play the game the way you play the game. We're discussing the strict letter of rule.

Which has already been pointed out is something this thread is well aware of. HIWPI is being discussed and you're coming in like a wrecking ball to reiterate points already made that the thread is past.

And actually, one person is telling them they can't play the game that way.

Jacksmiles wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the basic argument is: because you can't always fast roll FnPs, you should never fast roll them. Which, to me, sounds like saying: because you can't always fast roll Hit Rolls (because of varying weapon profiles in a unit), you should never fast roll them. Which is, obviously, ridiculous.

RAW, you can't fast roll FnP. You and your opponent may agree to house rule it for the sake of saving time, but it's just that - a house rule.

Literally everyone is aware of this, and that's how it's being presented. Did you even read all the responses before replying?

I did.

EDIT: it seems like people are You seem to be getting really emotional about technical corrections.

All I'm saying it's incorrect to assert that "you can do this if the results don't matter". My responses as indicated by the quotes are directed at flanderz who was seemingly arguing a HIWPI against a RAW.

 skchsan wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the basic argument is: because you can't always fast roll FnPs, you should never fast roll them. Which, to me, sounds like saying: because you can't always fast roll Hit Rolls (because of varying weapon profiles in a unit), you should never fast roll them. Which is, obviously, ridiculous.

RAW, you can't fast roll FnP. You and your opponent may agree to house rule it for the sake of saving time, but it's just that - a house rule.

Literally everyone is aware of this, and that's how it's being presented. Did you even read all the responses before replying?

I did.

EDIT: it seems like people are You seem to be getting really emotional about technical corrections.

All I'm saying it's incorrect to assert that "you can do this if the results don't matter".

I'm not getting emotional about technical corrections. It's annoying that someone jumps in at the end of page 2 or page 3 or whatever to repeat things already addressed like it's a brand new revelation. It doesn't add anything to the conversation.

Also, it is correct to assert that if the results won't matter, and both players agree, that someone can do whatever they want.

 skchsan wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the basic argument is: because you can't always fast roll FnPs, you should never fast roll them. Which, to me, sounds like saying: because you can't always fast roll Hit Rolls (because of varying weapon profiles in a unit), you should never fast roll them. Which is, obviously, ridiculous.

RAW, you can't fast roll FnP. You and your opponent may agree to house rule it for the sake of saving time, but it's just that - a house rule.

Literally everyone is aware of this, and that's how it's being presented. Did you even read all the responses before replying?

I did.

EDIT: it seems like people are You seem to be getting really emotional about technical corrections.

All I'm saying it's incorrect to assert that "you can do this if the results don't matter". My responses as indicated by the quotes are directed at flanderz who was seemingly arguing a HIWPI against a RAW.

It is not incorrect. I can do that. Come stop me.

messed up an edit, ignore this

Technically, you can do anything that everyone involved in the match agrees to. If you and your opponent decide that Orkz have a 3+ BS in your games, then guess what. Orkz in your games can hit on a 3+ with their Sluggas. Obviously this is an extreme example, and wouldn't fly at a tournament, but you get the idea. When I said "you can do this", I also specified that you could only do it with permission from your opponent and a TI (if applicable).

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Just seems like one of those things you should ask about before rolling. "Hey buddy, you mind if I fast roll these FNPs?" "Sure, no problem."

So, would you also say "No Problem" if I said "Hey buddy, I'm just going to assume all my rolls to hit pass?" If not, you're being hypocritical.

How is that hypocritical. If you ask if you can do it and the opponent says "no", then you don't do it.

I am saying that ignoring one rule but enforcing another is hypocritical. Either all rules should be followed, or none of them should IMHO, there is no middle ground.

So, according to yourself, you should not be playing any game of Wh40k ever, since the game does not work as written.

This is how I do it to go trough those saves faster with my DeathGuards. Say 1wound models, with 5+++ save being hit by a 2damage weapon. 5 goes trough their regular saves, and now for the +++saves.
I simply roll 5dice, and then I reroll all successes. Since I have to save both rolls for a model to survive, even a single fail means a dead model. So those who fail on my first roll are resolved, they will already remove/kill a model. For the model to survive both need to be a success, so those who also make their save after the reroll lives.

If the models got 2 wounds, I roll them of one model at a time, so two dice pr model simultaneously, one model at a time. Since making one save can make a actually difference.