PDA

View Full Version : 7+ to hit in CC? How does this work



Mythrider
06-02-2008, 06:49
Is it possible to have a unit that can not be hit in close combat?

Or does a 6 to hit always mean success. I don't have my BRB handy but I can't remember any rules for needing 7+ to hit in CC as there are for needing 7+ to hit when shooting.

The reason I ask is I'm planning a unit of Wild Riders led by a WR Kindred Noble with the Dawnspear.

Lets assume I'm charging and the target unit fails it's fear test. They now need 6s to hit my unit. Lets now assume that my Noble wounds someone; as a result the Dawnspear gives the whole enemy unit -1 to hit for this round.

Does my opponent even bother rolling to hit? Due to the penalty he can't roll higher than a 5, right.

knightime98
06-02-2008, 07:02
This is a RAW question.
In that, if a unit fails it's fear test then it requires a "6" to hit. It is because of the fear that the model needs a 6.. A "6" is always a hit unless you have an item that states you reroll hits or some such item. I am sure that the -1 to hit is only if the modifier can be adjusted. In this case it can not. If a 1 is always a miss then guess what... A 6 is always a hit (strictly speaking of Close Combat).

Furthermore, I do not either have my BRB but I do believe that 7th Ed. has maintained that a 6 is always a hit in CC.

xragg
06-02-2008, 07:21
Well, the RAW does state that 1 is always a miss, but I cant recall seeing it written that 6 is always a hit. For fear, it states that the unit can only hit on 6's or need 6's to hit, not that a 6 is an automatic hit (same is true for the first round of defending an obstacle too). Unless it clearly states that a 6 is always a hit as it clearly states a 1 is a miss, then I suppose by the RAW, someone could argue that needing a 7 to hit makes your unit unhitable.

We had this happen when I used my Dawnspear on a lord beside another hero with the item that gives all enemies w/i 6" -1 to hit (and stupidity to forest spirits). My lord was more then double the unit's WS, so they started off needing 5's, modified to 7's with both magic items. We all agreed that 6's should always hit as a house rule with out even looking for a clear statement. We all felt it was intended to be that way and didnt care if it was clearly stated or not.

kroq'gar
06-02-2008, 07:23
RAW says they will hit on 6's, not at say, -2.

Therefore the modifier is pointless, its just like waywatchers vs tombkings arrows..

Griefbringer
06-02-2008, 07:46
Furthermore, I do not either have my BRB but I do believe that 7th Ed. has maintained that a 6 is always a hit in CC.

Looking at the books, there seems to be a slight change of wording from 6th to 7th edition (close combat, "Hitting the enemy" section):

7th edition BRB, page 34: "Sometimes modifiers apply to these rolls, but normally an unmodified roll of 6 always hits and an unmodified 1 always misses."

6th edition BRB, page 69: "Sometimes modifiers apply to these rolls, but, unless is is specifically stated that hitting a model is impossible, an unmodified roll of 6 always hits."

Unfortunately somebody just had to insert the word "normally" there, which might give rules lawyers opportunity for interpretation.

[Edit: fear rules state that no modifiers are applied, so in that case a roll of 6 is always a hit.]

Braad
06-02-2008, 09:10
Hmmm, that's not sweet. My river trolls would have loved to be hit only on a 7+...
Well, 6+ is also nice.

Tutore
06-02-2008, 09:42
7+ is a rule stated only for throwing things. I think the "hit only on a 6+" fear rule means that it can't be modified, since, as kroq'gar said, there's no rule saying "-2 or -3 to hit".

knightime98
06-02-2008, 10:42
Some fine points have been made for the argument.
However, I believe the strongest argument is yet to be discussed.
There is no mention of how to attain a roll of a "7" in close combat.
There is mention of how to get a "7" for shooting. Which means that by default, it was
intended that a natural "6" is a hit for close combat.

Also the word, "normally" as pointed out by Griefbringer - I believe would hint to the idea of magic items that require you to reroll your hits. There is magic armor that a Chaos player can take that makes you do so. This would effectively, make the "6" now a miss perhaps with a reroll... So, it is open to interpretation.

Lastly, I believe that the argument can be made that the magic item(s) in question were intended to be used under normal rules. Meaning through regular combat where WS is used. Looking at the WS to hit chart the best attack value you can get is a 3 and the worst is a 5. By that standard you can then modify the roll by 1 either way. If you look at the specific wording of the item perhaps that may shed light on the situation.

gortexgunnerson
06-02-2008, 13:26
Some fine points have been made for the argument.
However, I believe the strongest argument is yet to be discussed.
There is no mention of how to attain a roll of a "7" in close combat.
There is mention of how to get a "7" for shooting. Which means that by default, it was
intended that a natural "6" is a hit for close combat

I do not think you can draw any assurance from the lack of a rule, shooting and close combat although share a few characteristics are completely different rules sets. Just as magic and shooting rules share elements such as magic missiles and targeting restrictions but the rules for how a magic missile and a missile weapon hit the same target are completly different. The lack of a rule for 1 doesn't apply it to the other and vice versa.

knightime98
07-02-2008, 05:31
I do not think you can draw any assurance from the lack of a rule, shooting and close combat although share a few characteristics are completely different rules sets. Just as magic and shooting rules share elements such as magic missiles and targeting restrictions but the rules for how a magic missile and a missile weapon hit the same target are completly different. The lack of a rule for 1 doesn't apply it to the other and vice versa.

Well then Gortexgunnerson, let me ask you this question.

1) How then do you roll a "7" to hit in close combat? Show me in the rules how to proceed?

2) By contrast, where in the rules does it say that if you need a "7" to hit in close combat that it is an automatic miss?

The Answer for both of these is NOT in there because a 6 is always a hit..

You see you can not have your cake and eat it too... There is no need to ever roll a "7" in close combat.
Where a 1 is always a miss, A 6 is always a hit in my book. That's the way our game club plays it... You can have all the modifiers you want but you can not ever roll higher than a 6 on a 6 sided die. It is the "best" result you can get..

Griefbringer
07-02-2008, 08:27
Also the word, "normally" as pointed out by Griefbringer - I believe would hint to the idea of magic items that require you to reroll your hits. There is magic armor that a Chaos player can take that makes you do so. This would effectively, make the "6" now a miss perhaps with a reroll... So, it is open to interpretation.


I am not sure that re-roll could really be considered as a modifier - it does not add or substract from the roll, but replaces it completely. I would blame sloppy writing on behalf of the writer.



1) How then do you roll a "7" to hit in close combat? Show me in the rules how to proceed?


While I am of the thought that an unmodified roll of 6 (after possible re-rolls) should be an automatic hit, I do not think that you can use this as an evidence, at least not without needing to rely on a lot of RAI interpretation.

Basically, the rules for rolling to hit in close combat cover quite clearly how to determine whether you hit: there is a target number, and you roll D6 and see if the result is equal to or higher than the target number. There is no fundamental need for special rules to cover the cases where the target number is outside the range of numbers attainable with a D6 - you can proceed perfectly normally in those cases.

[Not quite comparable, but Skaven need score of 13 on casting to gain irresistable force. There is no need for a special rule telling that they cannot gain it if they cast with only one or two power dice.]

knightime98
07-02-2008, 10:37
@Griefbringer
You have mentioned part 1 of my argument but have ignored part 2. You see it's a catch 22 here. It has to be one or the other. Neither can be answered.. That is the key.

Part 2 is this;

2) By contrast, where in the rules does it say that if you need a "7" to hit in close combat that it is an automatic miss?

I covered both bases showing both sides of the coin. In both cases, the answer is not given..

Edit: The question that really needs to be answered is this..
Every model has a number of attacks. This presents fundamentally the number of attacks that CAN hit.
Why then is the model being denied it's chance to hit??? Where is the evidence to show that the model CAN NOT hit it's target? Show me that! The answer is that you can not... That being said, I would say that over 95% of gamers would agree that a natural roll of a "6" is a hit regardless of the modifiers as there is no clear cut case in the matter.

Griefbringer
07-02-2008, 11:26
2) By contrast, where in the rules does it say that if you need a "7" to hit in close combat that it is an automatic miss?


I am missing the reason why the rules would need to state anything for this. The basic rules for hitting are pretty clear:

1.) You determine a target number (based on WS and modifiers)
2.) You roll a D6
3.) You check if the die roll was equal to or higher than target number

If you would need to roll 7 or more to hit, then you would still roll and compare the scores: if the roll was 7 or more (0% probability on D6) it would be a hit, otherwise not. There is no need for a specific rule to state how such a situation is resolved, because the basic rules cover it: you either roll high enough or you don't.

[Compare with Skaven rules: no special rule given for how to roll 13 on 2d6.]

I agree that an unmodified 6 should be an automatic hit, however I think some of these arguments of yours for it are not really relevant. As I quoted earlier, there is already an almost sufficiently clear statement directly in the rulebook:


7th edition BRB, page 34: "Sometimes modifiers apply to these rolls, but normally an unmodified roll of 6 always hits and an unmodified 1 always misses."


The only problem here being that the word "normally" is rather open to interpretation.



Every model has a number of attacks. This presents fundamentally the number of attacks that CAN hit.
Why then is the model being denied it's chance to hit??? Where is the evidence to show that the model CAN NOT hit it's target?

I think you are imposing here to Attacks characteristics properties that are not implied in rules.

Nurgling Chieftain
07-02-2008, 20:15
The only problem here being that the word "normally" is rather open to interpretation.I suspect that's there because some magic weapons DO automatically hit.

knightime98
08-02-2008, 07:01
Two other key components.. I do not have the Army book that shows that item
the "Dawnspear".. The exact wording of the item...

Secondly, as mentioned above - that fear if imposed says you need a 6 unmodified or some such wording... So, that if interpretation is correct solves the problem.

You can not modify the needing a 6 to hit for fear - so it seems to me.

Griefbringer
08-02-2008, 08:23
I suspect that's there because some magic weapons DO automatically hit.

Not that I could think of many - Destroyer of Eternities perhaps?

However, instead of using the rather vague word "normally" they could have instead worded something like "unless explicitely stated otherwise".

Braad
08-02-2008, 14:05
Where's Festus when you need him?

Leth Shyish'phak
08-02-2008, 16:21
Two other key components.. I do not have the Army book that shows that item
the "Dawnspear".. The exact wording of the item...

Secondly, as mentioned above - that fear if imposed says you need a 6 unmodified or some such wording... So, that if interpretation is correct solves the problem.

You can not modify the needing a 6 to hit for fear - so it seems to me.


Forget about the fear then(as the words "hits on 6's" are quite clear), and use another example.

WS3 troops attacking a Vapire Lord riding a Zombie dragon and carrying the Cursed book. They need 5's to hit normally and they have a -2 penalty.

As has already been said, you roll the dice and see if any match the required number. When needing 7's to hit, they quite clearly will not have come up with the required number and so they will miss.

Mercules
11-02-2008, 19:10
Forget about the fear then(as the words "hits on 6's" are quite clear), and use another example.

WS3 troops attacking a Vapire Lord riding a Zombie dragon and carrying the Cursed book. They need 5's to hit normally and they have a -2 penalty.

As has already been said, you roll the dice and see if any match the required number. When needing 7's to hit, they quite clearly will not have come up with the required number and so they will miss.

Dang it... that was the example I found. With a WS of 8 any models with a WS of 3 or less need a 5 normally and thus need a 7 after figuring out the -1 & -1 modifier. I might be able to find other examples of of multiple -1 to hit combos if I look harder.

Shamfrit
11-02-2008, 20:47
Don't you need to roll a 6, and then a 4+ for a 7+ to hit?

There's something in the rule book, unless that rule only applies for shooting.

Griefbringer
11-02-2008, 21:28
Shamfrit, that is for shooting only.

[Though back in 3rd ed there was a similar rules for CC I think, but that was dropped with 4th.]

DeathlessDraich
11-02-2008, 21:55
What?! 3rd Ed?
From the last century!

What is this a history lesson!? :p

That makes you at least 62 yrs old Griefbringer.

Why is this question still being discussed? :D

Leth Shyish'phak
12-02-2008, 13:06
Why is this question still being discussed? :D

For the usual reasons that people don't just stop a discussion alf way through without finding an answer...

Festus
12-02-2008, 13:11
For the usual reasons that people don't just stop a discussion alf way through without finding an answer...
There is an answer: 6 is a hit.

Festus

Jagosaja
12-02-2008, 13:40
7th edition BRB, page 34: "Sometimes modifiers apply to these rolls, but normally an unmodified roll of 6 always hits and an unmodified 1 always misses."

True, word "normally" does bring confusion. but the key word is unmodified. Before any modifiers are applied all 6-es automatically hit. Then we modify the rest of dice. In the same way, if we give Sword of Striking to a Wight King in the Grave Guard Unit carrying Banner of Barrows, and the Vampire Lord carrying Crown of commandment gives them his WS7, therefore enabling him to hit WS3 enemies on 1, this does not mean Wight King will automatically hit, he will still miss on basic, unmodified rolls of 1.

"Normally" does not mean "in normal circumstances" in this case, but "as would be normal". It would be clearer if they had written "naturally", but I have the feeling we would misinterpret the definition all over again.

Griefbringer
12-02-2008, 13:56
That makes you at least 62 yrs old Griefbringer.


You must have mixed me with Crazy Harborc.

I bought my copy of 3rd edition second hand, well after the time it became OOP.

Briohmar
12-02-2008, 14:19
What?! 3rd Ed?
From the last century!
That makes you at least 62 yrs old Griefbringer.

Excuse me!:mad: but I bought my 3rd edition books when they were first released, And I'm not 62. In point of fact I'll only be celebrating my 10th birthday on the last day of this month.

Festus
12-02-2008, 14:21
Hi

[Though back in 3rd ed there was a similar rules for CC I think, but that was dropped with 4th.]
Correct: BRB WHFB3rd, p.62 details this (much akin to todays shooting rules 7+ to hit).

Funny that it is on p.62, Griefbringer's alleged age ;)

Festus

edit: So Briohmar turns 40 this year - what a nice age to be :D

Finnigan2004
12-02-2008, 14:31
So what happens if someone throws an annoyance of nettlings (you need a "6" to hit in challenges) and a fimbulwinter shard (-1 to hit) on his wardancer hero and then challenges my daemon prince (hypothetically speaking)? The unmodified 6 would indicate that I should hit, and the fact that the annoyance says that I will only hit on 6's, but if he gets to modify the "6" to a "5" I can never hit. The roolz boyz at GW mail order thought that it would be impossible to hit, but the ruling in store was a 7+ to hit. I still think that because of the writing of the annoyance that 6 should hit, and because of the rule about rolling an unmodified "6".

Griefbringer
12-02-2008, 14:55
The roolz boyz at GW mail order thought that it would be impossible to hit

Hint: never trust the mail order roolz boyz, they have notorious reputation for coming up with resolutions that cannot be supported by the actual rules. :evilgrin: