PDA

View Full Version : Reroll vs hatred



Maelstorm
29-03-2010, 01:41
Just a little question.

Say if we have a Chaos Hero with the armour of damnation (all succesful hits must be rerolled) getting struck by a character with hatred. The 1 time hits is ofc re-rolled, but the misses are re-roll due to hatred, but what if those hits? The same dice canīt be re-rolled twice, so what happens?

And what about the same scenario but if the Chaos character is wielding The Father of Blades (oneīs to hit, hit the attacker), are those consider misses, and would hence be re-rolled with hatred, or are they hits, just on the wrong guy?

Shed some light please :P

Agnar the Howler
29-03-2010, 02:06
Just a little question.

Say if we have a Chaos Hero with the armour of damnation (all succesful hits must be rerolled) getting struck by a character with hatred. The 1 time hits is ofc re-rolled, but the misses are re-roll due to hatred, but what if those hits? The same dice canīt be re-rolled twice, so what happens?

And what about the same scenario but if the Chaos character is wielding The Father of Blades (oneīs to hit, hit the attacker), are those consider misses, and would hence be re-rolled with hatred, or are they hits, just on the wrong guy?

Shed some light please :P

The first I assume would be sucessful hits that are then re-rolled cannot be re-rolled if they miss, as you can't re-roll a re-roll unless it's specifically stated (such as the Eye of the Gods table in the WoC book).

The second... i'm not sure. I'm tempted to say they can't be re-rolled, as they are sucessful hits, just on themselves, but feel free to correct me, as i'm not 100% sure.

Ethriel
29-03-2010, 02:17
For the first one, the proper way, would be to roll all the dice twice.

For the second, I would have to go with re-roll the 1s because of Hatred, as they didn't hit the target...which is what the hatred re-roll represents.

Zaustus
29-03-2010, 03:09
Ethriel has it right. In the first scenario, all of the dice are rolled, then all the hits and all the misses are re-rolled. Thus all the dice are re-rolled. You basically just roll twice, and the second roll stands.

In the second scenario, the 1s are re-rolled due to hatred. Any 1s rolled with the re-rolls will then strike the attacker.

Flash Felix
29-03-2010, 03:11
Ethriel has it right. In the first scenario, all of the dice are rolled, then all the hits and all the misses are re-rolled. Thus all the dice are re-rolled. You basically just roll twice, and the second roll stands.



...or you could accept that the two just cancel each other out, and therefore you only roll once.

Zaustus
29-03-2010, 03:51
Hey, this forum is about rules. By the rules, you roll all the dice twice. If you want to just roll once and call it good, then great, that makes sense. But it's a house-rule.

Ayliffe
29-03-2010, 03:57
this question comes up weekly.

The first roll is nullified, the second roll stands as it is.

Flash Felix
29-03-2010, 04:26
Hey, this forum is about rules. By the rules, you roll all the dice twice. If you want to just roll once and call it good, then great, that makes sense. But it's a house-rule.

Fair enough. And apologies for coming across as a bit of a smart-****, it wasn't intentional.

Zaustus
29-03-2010, 07:32
Fair enough. And apologies for coming across as a bit of a smart-****, it wasn't intentional.

No offense taken, and no apology needed. :)

GWItheUltimate
29-03-2010, 12:29
Rolling twice and take the second roll vs rolling once is statistically the same thing... please don't be so picky !

Ultimate Life Form
29-03-2010, 12:40
Rolling twice and take the second roll vs rolling once is statistically the same thing... please don't be so picky !

Yes, how dumb of us to point out what the official rules say.

I take it you've never played a Warhammer game before, because otherwise you'd know that the rolls usually veer wildly from average statistics, and a second roll can drastically change the outcome of a battle, and I would feel cheated if it doesn't happen. I suppose you play the game using a calculator rather than dice.

The curtain rises for another 'codex is the same as army book', 'one roll is the same as two rolls', 'I do what I want because I don't care what's written anywhere' thread.

Bladelord
29-03-2010, 14:51
I Agree with the Druid (=Ultimate Life Form):p

GWItheUltimate
29-03-2010, 16:39
Yes, how dumb of us to point out what the official rules say.

I take it you've never played a Warhammer game before, because otherwise you'd know that the rolls usually veer wildly from average statistics, and a second roll can drastically change the outcome of a battle, and I would feel cheated if it doesn't happen. I suppose you play the game using a calculator rather than dice.

The curtain rises for another 'codex is the same as army book', 'one roll is the same as two rolls', 'I do what I want because I don't care what's written anywhere' thread.

Dude, what I was saying is that:

"roll one dice, ignore result and roll it again"

equals

"roll one dice and take the result"

You don't have to write a post full of ******** on me for saying a obvious thing.

xragg
29-03-2010, 18:40
Yes, how dumb of us to point out what the official rules say.

I take it you've never played a Warhammer game before, because otherwise you'd know that the rolls usually veer wildly from average statistics, and a second roll can drastically change the outcome of a battle, and I would feel cheated if it doesn't happen. I suppose you play the game using a calculator rather than dice.

The curtain rises for another 'codex is the same as army book', 'one roll is the same as two rolls', 'I do what I want because I don't care what's written anywhere' thread.

...cause dice have a memory. When a first roll can have zero impact on the game, how can a second roll change anything? Feel free to roll twice and state how the rules support this, or just agree with your opponent that the first roll is irrellavent. Your snide response is not called for and not correct.

Ultimate Life Form
29-03-2010, 21:48
When a first roll can have zero impact on the game, how can a second roll change anything?

First roll; all my poisoned to-hit rolls are 1's. Second roll (that is required by the rules): All my poisoned to-hit rolls are 6's. THAT's how it changes things. Of course it could be the other way around, and I won't complain. Warhammer is not a mathematical theory; it's about actual happenings.

Your actions change the course of the game!!!

I hope that wasn't too difficult to understand because it's actually the most basic part of the game. If I want a lecture in statistics I'll go to Uni.

GWItheUltimate
29-03-2010, 22:00
First roll; all my poisoned to-hit rolls are 1's. Second roll (that is required by the rules): All my poisoned to-hit rolls are 6's. THAT's how it changes things. Of course it could be the other way around, and I won't complain. Warhammer is not a mathematical theory; it's about actual happenings.

Your actions change the course of the game!!!

I hope that wasn't too difficult to understand because it's actually the most basic part of the game. If I want a lecture in statistics I'll go to Uni.

Your logic dosen't make any sense... go do some more math/probability bro.

If you roll 6 x 1s, you still have the same chance or rolling 6 x 1s if you re-roll all the dice.

If you wanna roll twice, it's up to you, but do not cry all the game about the first roll that dosen't even count.

...and please do not play Texas Hold'em no-limit !!! :evilgrin:

Ultimate Life Form
29-03-2010, 22:11
If you roll 6 x 1s, you still have the same chance or rolling 6 x 1s if you re-roll all the dice.


Yes, but the result isn't determined by what my chances are but what the dice actually show. What's so hard to grasp about it? The chances are always the same even if I reroll a million times, but that is beside the point!!! The only important thing is what actually happens!

Let's make it clear with an example: I make two exemplary rolls, let's say for the one important break test that will decide the outcome of the game.

Roll A:
12

Roll B:
2

Now these aren't any probabilities or theory, these are actual rolls I just made. Now the rules kick in. Because the dice roll has to be rerolled, the second roll, Roll B, does count and override the result of Roll A. I win the game. Now you, by claiming that it doesn't matter, won't accept this and persist that the first roll had the same chances so we could use it just as well and you would consequentally win the game. While the first part of this statement holds true, the second doesn't. I'm not arguing against statistics here but simply against the false claim that it doesn't change anything.

GWItheUltimate
29-03-2010, 23:38
"Now you, by claiming that it doesn't matter, won't accept this and persist that the first roll had the same chances so we could use it just as well..."


Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. But the fact is you're not suppose to know the result before you apply the rules, so this is where you apply probability.

Let's say we face each other, you attack me with hatred and I have Armour of Damnation. Your rule says re-roll failed to-hit rolls and mine says re-roll successful to-hit rolls. Then, if you sums these two rules up, you have to re-roll all the dice ! (We still haven't roll any dice yet) Knowing that your first roll will be re-rolled and completely ignore, the possible outcomes of the second rolls ARE EXACTLY THE SAME of the first rolls (which you seams to agreed). At this point, BEFORE YOU ROLL ANY DICE, we could just ignore both rules and only roll the "to hit rolls" once, and the outcomes would be EXACTLY THE SAME. That's it, that's all. That sums my point completely.

Understand me well, this wouldn't work if there were ONLY Hatered involved or ONLY the Armour of damnation (or on a re-roll allowed by the BSB for exemple), because to fail to hit with hatred you would have to fail the roll TWICE IN A ROW, which is completely different.

I'm not making this personal or anything, I'm just trying to teach you in the probability ways, because I've studied it a lot (and i'm not talking about simple D6 rolls probability).

If, at this point, you still either don't beleive me or don't want to beleive me, this is perfectly fine and I would strongly suggest you, in the situation that was mentionned above, that you roll the dice twice and keep only the second result. This will be perfectly statisticly equivalent to rolling the dice only once.

Now if you still say that Roll A = 2 and Roll B = 12 and you HAVE TO, by rules take Roll B, then yes, it would have been better to take roll A. It's always better to roll low on a break test, or to roll 6 on a killing blow, but that dosen't solve anything.

I can still demonstrate it mathematically if someone ask for it thought...

Necromancy Black
30-03-2010, 00:17
Who cares about if it's statistically the same? The rules says reroll everything so that's what you should be doing, anything else is a house rule.

And yes, in ULF example he has just as much change on the second roll of rolling all 1's again as rolling all 6's, but obviously he's going to want to reroll, as per the rules, to try and get some six's compared to none.

Statistics might say overall it doesn't matter, but try using maths to say in ULF example there's no point to rerolling.

Nurgling Chieftain
30-03-2010, 00:22
It's not particularly important whether you roll once or twice. It's very important to decide which before you actually roll. If you don't make such an explicit statement like "this is the second roll", then you should pick them all up and roll them again.

Otherwise, you could get a roll you like (or dislike) and then decide to keep that roll "because it doesn't matter" (or re-roll it "because that's what you're supposed to do").

GWItheUltimate
30-03-2010, 00:25
you absolutly have to agree before with your opponent. If you don't mention it, role twice as per the rules like Nurgling says.

xragg
30-03-2010, 02:48
you absolutly have to agree before with your opponent. If you don't mention it, role twice as per the rules like Nurgling says.

And I agree also. I pretty sure we're all agreeing to this is what should happen.

Imagine when you roll your first set of dice, keeping your eyes shut, then picking them up and rerolling them. How did the result from the first roll change to the reroll? You dont know cause you never looked and I doesnt matter cause the first roll had no impact on the game. The first roll basically doesnt exist. If you look at the first roll and compare it to your reroll, you are only fooling yourself if you felt it changed the game somehow.

Its no different then poker. If your heads up and fold your cards on the flop, its pointless to run the cards to see what would have happened. The hand is over when someone wins it. It can be fun to look, but its foolish to actually analyze your decision making from it.

Omegakai
30-03-2010, 03:08
say you roll 4 dice. those that hit reroll, those that miss reroll, last result stands.

Ultimate Life Form
30-03-2010, 08:55
you absolutly have to agree before with your opponent. If you don't mention it, role twice as per the rules like Nurgling says.

So we all finally agree.

The probabilities are always the same and won't change even if I reroll a million times, but it is important nonetheless because the rules say if of the one million rolls the first result has to apply or the second, because they are no longer statistical data but actual facts since they randomly came up in that particular order.

AMWOOD co
31-03-2010, 03:31
So, Ultimate Life Form, your argument is simply a distinction between statistical data vs. statistical probability?

If that's the case I don't see a problem. Usually I just tell my opponent, "Okay, you cause hatred and reroll misses and I have the Armour of Damnation so you reroll hits. You reroll all the first rolls so lets just skip it and move on with your real roll."

That's what I say. They say, "Huh?"

I sigh and tell them to roll and then reroll everything anyway. It takes them a while, but they get it eventually.

For how simple all this really is, it is amazing how much confusion it leads to, isn't it. It's been argued to the Realm of Chaos and back since Hordes of Chaos was released all those years ago.

Palatine Katinka
31-03-2010, 03:54
I would think that in the first round you would probably end up rolling twice -BECAUSE- in my experience most people don't declare all the special items/abilities/rules they have access to until they need them so in the first round the to hit roll will be made and seen before each player reveals their rerolls and then a second roll would be made once all the cards are on the table. After this both players would probably agree to just roll once when the character encounters hateful foes.

Maelstorm
31-03-2010, 14:32
Yea, so basiclly the first rolls of the dice is always rerolled, since all misses are re-rolled, and all hits are re-rolled, but thats where it ends, right? Since a re-rolled dice canīt be re-rolled, those succesful hits made by the hatred re-roll will not be re-rolled, even though they are succesful hits and by the Armours rules, should be re-rolled.

...damn, this stuff is pretty tricky :P

Maelstorm
31-03-2010, 14:35
Oh, and with the Father of Blades, wouldnīt you be able to say that the 1īs are hits, just not on the intended target, and therefore canīt be re-rolled with Hatred. Are the def of Hatred "re-roll all misses" or "re-roll all unsuccesful to-hit rolls"? If it is just misses, then you should not be allowed to re-roll, since it isnīt a miss, just a very clumsy hit. Right?

rtunian
31-03-2010, 15:20
you roll the dice twice because the rules say to roll the dice twice. the misses reroll, the hits reroll.

it's not about probability, it's about following the rules. if the rules said "stand on one foot while making armor saves", then if the question was asked "do i have to stand on one foot while making armor saves... it seems kind of dumb, and doesn't affect the probability at all?", the answer would be "yes, you have to stand on one foot while making armor saves, because that's what the rules say to do."

if you and your opponent decide that you just want to roll once (or that you'd rather roll your armor saves with both feet on the ground), then that's both fine and dandy. you can play the game however you both agree to play it.

but when you come to warseer rules forum and ask "do i have to follow the rules?" the answer will always be "yes, you do"

Bac5665
31-03-2010, 16:19
you roll the dice twice because the rules say to roll the dice twice. the misses reroll, the hits reroll.

it's not about probability, it's about following the rules. if the rules said "stand on one foot while making armor saves", then if the question was asked "do i have to stand on one foot while making armor saves... it seems kind of dumb, and doesn't affect the probability at all?", the answer would be "yes, you have to stand on one foot while making armor saves, because that's what the rules say to do."

if you and your opponent decide that you just want to roll once (or that you'd rather roll your armor saves with both feet on the ground), then that's both fine and dandy. you can play the game however you both agree to play it.

but when you come to warseer rules forum and ask "do i have to follow the rules?" the answer will always be "yes, you do"

This post needs to be put in bold letters at the top of every rules forum thread. I don't care what rules you play by and what ones you don't, this forum is about what the rules are, not how you play them.

rtunian, I applaud your post, sir.

Feefait
31-03-2010, 19:02
When did you get so negative Ulf? You used to have some positive contributions instead of complaining about threads, subjects or anything else. No one is saying that you ca't get 2 different results on 2 rolls. All that is being said is that if they are both completely random and only the second one stand thens why bother with roll A at all? Surely thats not so difficult of a concept to understand. Kind of fits in with GW's 'quick dice rolling' theory by elminiating some unnescessary rolls in my opinion.

Ultimate Life Form
31-03-2010, 19:46
When did you get so negative Ulf?

Well it all started when I came to WarSeer... :cries:

The eternal crusade against half-truths, 'liberal' rule interpretations and the same questions popping up on a weekly basis can leave any man empty and hollow. :cries:

That, coupled with the constant influx of new members (who will ask the same things again) and discussion participants who are either unwilling or simply unable (I sometimes cannnot tell which) to grasp the most simple concepts has made me a bit weary recently. I'm feeling old now. :o

I apologize if I came across as somewhat bossy at first, but I dropped in here coming fresh from a discussion with a particularly... tough customer, to put it politely, and it awfully reminded me of that, so I just lost it. I'm glad I have a reputation of adding some valuable contributions and will try to live up to that.

Oh, and on the topic... I thank rtunian for excellently summing up exatly how I feel. Actually that is the true reason why I argued, but I did not want to adress it directly because I've had enough of being ridiculed for actually following the rules and feared I would be dragged into that discussion again, and that it would drag on... and on... and on... :cries:

(Apparently I'm already developing some kind of avoidance behavior because it can be so arduous)

So, yeah... thanks for the support. Makes me actually feel better.

shakedown47
01-04-2010, 05:16
To the OP, this is how to resolve your situation.

An assassin rolls seven attacks versus a character with the Armour of Damnation. He rolls 4 hits and 3 misses; one of the misses is a 1.

He then, in no particular order, re-rolls the 4 hits (as per the AoD rule) and the two misses that were not a 1 (as per his Hatred rule.) Hatred allows a re-roll on MISSES in close combat, the Father of Blades cause models attacking the bearer to HIT themselves on the roll of a 1. Since a 1 is a HIT in this case, it is by definition not a MISS.

If the end result ends up being 3 hits and 4 misses, and two of the misses are 1's, then you will resolve 3 of the hits against the Chaos character and two hits against the assassin.

It's as simple as that, and RAW.

Nurgling Chieftain
01-04-2010, 06:54
Since a 1 is a HIT in this case, it is by definition not a MISS.By what definition? Let's say I, personally, shoot at a target and hit the ground next to it. According to your definition, that's a "HIT" and therefore not a "MISS". But in all normal usage of the terms, that is quite definitely a miss, regardless of whether it hit something else.

Dutch_Digger
01-04-2010, 08:05
- edit-

nvm this has actually been answered..

Taureus
01-04-2010, 08:20
By what definition? Let's say I, personally, shoot at a target and hit the ground next to it. According to your definition, that's a "HIT" and therefore not a "MISS". But in all normal usage of the terms, that is quite definitely a miss, regardless of whether it hit something else.

By the definition of the Father of Blades.

WoC AB, Page 113: "Any 'to hit' rolls directed against the bearer that result in the roll of a '1' instead hit the attacking model."

Kal Taron
01-04-2010, 13:31
But then you would have to reroll the 1 because of armour of damnation. "...must re-roll successfull rolls to hit." You hit something so you were successful.

shakedown47
01-04-2010, 13:44
But then you would have to reroll the 1 because of armour of damnation. "...must re-roll successfull rolls to hit." You hit something so you were successful.

The Armour of Damnation forces re-rolls on attacks that have hit specifically the character wearing the armour, not on attacks that have hit in general (i.e., attacks that have hit the attacking player.)


By what definition? Let's say I, personally, shoot at a target and hit the ground next to it. According to your definition, that's a "HIT" and therefore not a "MISS". But in all normal usage of the terms, that is quite definitely a miss, regardless of whether it hit something else.

Seriously? Dude if it's getting so that you can't distinguish between real life and the terminology of rules for this game, take a couple of weeks away from the gaming table for your good health.

nearchus
01-04-2010, 14:17
The Armour of Damnation forces re-rolls on attacks that have hit specifically the character wearing the armour, not on attacks that have hit in general (i.e., attacks that have hit the attacking player.)


Actually, as the rule as quoted is "directed against the bearer" and not "hit(s) specifically the character wearing the armor" I'd think you would re-roll it. The attack was "directed against" the person wearing the armor.

I'd also suggest that whether you re-roll 1's when Hatred and the Armour of Damnation collide is ambiguous. You could argue that until the "miss" has been re-rolled with Hatred there is no "result in the roll of a '1'". Don't get me wrong, I believe your interpretation is just as valid. But language being what it is, the issue is not nearly as clear as people would like to think it is.

In any case, I'd highly suggest that local groups discuss and agree as to how to interpret the rule before it comes up in the game (if possible). And if not possible then you should handle it as GW generally deals with issues like this: "There are many such combinations of rules and magic items in the game, and we handle it by discussing what we think should happen, and then rolling off if an immediate answer isn’t forthcoming." (from the Lizardmen FAQ specifically, but there are many instances of them giving similar responses.)

rtunian
01-04-2010, 14:55
a roll of 1 is not a hit, it is a miss, and you cannot hit yourself in close combat.

a magic item can cause a hit upon you if you roll a certain number to-hit, but that is not you dealing a hit. that is you being dealt a hit by triggering a magic item. if the trigger is a roll of a 1, and a roll of a 1 is a miss, and the attacker gets to reroll all misses, then only a 2nd 1 will trigger the armor, because the 2nd result always stands.

Taureus
01-04-2010, 23:02
a roll of 1 is not a hit, it is a miss, and you cannot hit yourself in close combat.

a magic item can cause a hit upon you if you roll a certain number to-hit, but that is not you dealing a hit. that is you being dealt a hit by triggering a magic item. if the trigger is a roll of a 1, and a roll of a 1 is a miss, and the attacker gets to reroll all misses, then only a 2nd 1 will trigger the armor, because the 2nd result always stands.

Paraphrased: It's not a hit, but it is a hit.

You just contradicted yourself.

And the ability of the armor overrides the Hatred of the attacking player.

Nurgling Chieftain
01-04-2010, 23:53
Hitting something other than your target is also called MISSING.


By the definition of the Father of Blades.

WoC AB, Page 113: "Any 'to hit' rolls directed against the bearer that result in the roll of a '1' instead hit the attacking model."Nothing in that contradicts my point (which is that hitting something other than your target means you missed). It is the very notion that "hitting" is a state that contradicts "missing" (when applied to something other than your target) that is a made-up definition bearing no resemblance to either reality or anything in the rules.


Dude if it's getting so that you can't distinguish between real life and the terminology of rules for this game, take a couple of weeks away from the gaming table for your good health.The rules present no alternative definition which support any sort of counter-argument in the first place.

Zaustus
02-04-2010, 00:39
I've stated my position on page 1 of this thread, but wanted to chime in that I agree with Nurgling Chieftain and rtunian (hence my initial post).

However, the wording is ambiguous enough that in order to avoid problems, it should probably be discussed with your opponent or diced-off.

rtunian
02-04-2010, 01:13
Paraphrased: It's not a hit, but it is a hit.

You just contradicted yourself.

And the ability of the armor overrides the Hatred of the attacking player.

oh did i?
or did you just oversimplify what i said?

oversimplification is dangerous. i said, "a rich man is not a poor man", and you 'paraphrase' by saying, "a man is not a man". unfortunately, it's not paraphrasing if the meaning is lost. and you have clearly lost the meaning. or you're just trolling~

Taureus
03-04-2010, 21:16
Well since both ******s of the rules board have chimed in and shat upon anyone with a dissenting opinion, the OP is free to listen to whoever he wants to.

Ganymede
03-04-2010, 21:42
Oh, and with the Father of Blades, wouldnīt you be able to say that the 1īs are hits, just not on the intended target, and therefore canīt be re-rolled with Hatred. Are the def of Hatred "re-roll all misses" or "re-roll all unsuccesful to-hit rolls"? If it is just misses, then you should not be allowed to re-roll, since it isnīt a miss, just a very clumsy hit. Right?

You don't actually apply the results or consequences of a specific die roll before a re roll. When you reroll, it is ass if the original roll never happened.