PDA

View Full Version : ASF reroll hits!?!?



Yrrdead
17-09-2010, 06:47
Thanks to knightwire for bringing this to my attention. This was buried in another thread and I wanted to make sure that people got a look at this. In my opinion it definitely deserves its own thread.

To quote;


Always Strikes First
[...]
In addition, if the model's Initiative is equal to or higher than his enemy's, he can re-roll failed misses when striking in close combat - [...]

How awesome is that.

SiNNiX
17-09-2010, 06:50
Yeah, it's actually complete common knowledge at this point. This is what makes HE very potent, as well as a KOS with Soul Hunger (reroll misses to hit and wound).

This is actually the main benefit of ASF in 8th considering all striking is now done in Initiative order regardless of charges, making the previous ASF rule almost useless. :rolleyes:

Yrrdead
17-09-2010, 06:53
Really , did you read what I posted. I'm on here all the time. I know how ASF is supposed to work.

My point was ..... did you read it?

SiNNiX
17-09-2010, 06:57
I'm so confused now... must... lay... down...

Were you not trying to let people know that ASF allows you to reroll misses to hit in close combat with equal or higher Initiative? Because I gotta tell you, that's definitely what appears to be going on.

Did I miss something?

Ultimate Life Form
17-09-2010, 06:59
If you know how it works, why are you surprised (and what is the fuss all about)? What you quoted is basically the standard ASF rule we all have in our BRBs, nothing new here.

SiNNiX
17-09-2010, 07:03
If you know how it works, why are you surprised (and what is the fuss all about)? What you quoted is basically the standard ASF rule we all have in our BRBs, nothing new here.

Right, but I think we're missing something he was trying to say here... or did we? I have no clue at this point! Until told otherwise, I am under the impression that I missed some obvious part of his post that serves as the purpose of this thread, and until then, I feel like an idiot for not knowing wtf it is (if not to let us know about ASF's amazingness).

Marwynn
17-09-2010, 07:04
Haha, guys read it again.

"Failed Misses". A successful miss is just, well a regular miss. So a failed miss is a hit.

It's just GW's screwy wording.

xalfej
17-09-2010, 07:05
It's a double negative. Meaning you re roll successful hits.

clearly this is how it is intended, as the models are over zealously swinging their weapons and any hit that actually made contact was a fluke

~xalfej

SiNNiX
17-09-2010, 07:06
Haha, guys read it again.

"Failed Misses". A successful miss is just, well a regular miss. So a failed miss is a hit.

It's just GW's screwy wording.

See, that's too much for me at 2AM after a night of drinking. Way too much thinking involved in this one.

Yes, I know you underlined and bolded it for us. I know! :mad:

Edit: As someone who stands by RAW religiously, looks like I'm gonna start having to reroll successful hits with my KOS now. :( Oh well!

Ultimate Life Form
17-09-2010, 07:09
Okay, I'm not a native speaker so that nuance passed by me (or maybe I'm already developing a resistance to GW's screwy wording), but that does hardly deserve a rules thread. So I'm confused. Are you implying the OP is trying to construe a hypothesis that you should reroll your hits? :confused:

Yrrdead
17-09-2010, 07:11
A double negative is exactly what I was trying point at in a tongue in cheek fashion.


A failed miss = a hit

Therefore ASF makes you reroll successful hits. Which is generally considered a negative thing.

SiNNiX
17-09-2010, 07:14
Therefore ASF makes you reroll successful hits. Which is generally considered a negative thing.

I disagree. Makes me work harder for DOC wins.

And just so we're clear, as you all know, ULF and I are very adamant about RAW, so we will not be changing our ways just because our troops are less effective!

Isn't that right, ULF!?



ULF? ... ULF??? *crickets*

Ultimate Life Form
17-09-2010, 07:19
It says he can reroll failed misses, not that he must.

Also apparently this rule does not apply to female models.

eyescrossed
17-09-2010, 07:20
It's like saying "I didn't do nothing." It implies you did something.

Yrrdead
17-09-2010, 07:21
Those darn chauvinist pigs at GW have gone too far this time.

Chris_
17-09-2010, 07:21
Yeah, funny as hell. I'll bring this out when a HE player is bitching about something else...

JonnyTHM
17-09-2010, 09:57
Failure describes intent, the real question is what your intent is when you're rolling to hit with your model... Failed misses aren't hits if you didn't intend to miss.

SiNNiX
17-09-2010, 12:49
Failure describes intent, the real question is what your intent is when you're rolling to hit with your model... Failed misses aren't hits if you didn't intend to miss.

It's so true! I engage units in close combat without the intention of hurting them all the time! :p

theunwantedbeing
17-09-2010, 13:11
A failed miss is a hit, as you failed to miss so must have hit.

So the ASF rules, as per RAW do indeed for you to re-roll successful hits.

Nice catch.

knightwire
17-09-2010, 14:32
Which brings us at last to the moment of truth, wherein the fundamental flaw is ultimately expressed, and the Anomaly revealed as both beginning and end. There are two doors. The door to your right leads to RAI and the salvation of your game. The door to your left leads to RAW and the end of your game as you know it. As you adequately put, the problem is choice. But we already know what you are going to do, don't we?

;)

DrMabutu
17-09-2010, 22:57
Which brings us at last to the moment of truth, wherein the fundamental flaw is ultimately expressed, and the Anomaly revealed as both beginning and end. There are two doors. The door to your right leads to RAI and the salvation of your game. The door to your left leads to RAW and the end of your game as you know it. As you adequately put, the problem is choice. But we already know what you are going to do, don't we?

;)

Good quote.

Even so its obvious what everyone (Including GW) is gonna do, probably because the description of the rule shows what they intended it to do; "he moves so fast that he can land blows with incredible precision". Then it goes on to describe the rule as a benefit.

theunwantedbeing
17-09-2010, 23:12
Good quote.

Even so its obvious what everyone (Including GW) is gonna do, probably because the description of the rule shows what they intended it to do; "he moves so fast that he can land blows with incredible precision". Then it goes on to describe the rule as a benefit.

Obviously the rule is an error that made it past the proofreading team.

RAI is very clear.
RAW is hailarious and well worth a few minutes trying to make the HE player play that way. If you can argue to a roll off, and win all the better :)

SiNNiX
18-09-2010, 01:56
I'm gonna start arguing this against HE players now.

Chris_
18-09-2010, 04:34
It is the perfect weapon against a HE player who got off the boosted Purple Sun on IF last round and now claim you have to dispell it on 25+ :) Just say that you will agree to do that if he agrees to re-rolling all his hits ;)

T10
18-09-2010, 10:10
If it hasn't been stated already: "failed misses" as a game term doesn't have a clear meaning. Considering the fact that models have to attack when able to it can safely be inferred that they are fighting to the best of their ability. Even if you (the player) can see a benefit in having a unit perform poorly, the unit is compelled to make its best effort.

As such it means that a hit is a success and a miss is a failure. A "failed miss" is... just nonsense.

So what to do? The Always strike First rule allows for the model with the rule to re-roll his to-hit rolls in close combat under certain circumstances where he has the advantage.

Arguing that the re-roll is lost due to the unclear wording isn't really an issue: The model gets to re-roll, but you need to determine what.

Arguing that the model must re-roll successful hits is merely malicious. It involves wilfully selecting the most disadvantageous effect from what stems from an advantage.

-T10

knightwire
18-09-2010, 23:46
It is the perfect weapon against a HE player who got off the boosted Purple Sun on IF last round and now claim you have to dispell it on 25+ :) Just say that you will agree to do that if he agrees to re-rolling all his hits ;)

You should dispel on a 25+. :evilgrin: (But that's an argument for another thread)


I truly hope none of you make a total ass of yourselves and honestly try to make your opponent re-roll their hits in this scenario. It would be quite sad. ;)

T10, there's not much unclear with "failed misses". It should say you re-roll "failed to-hit rolls" or "unsuccessful hits". (Your choice) It's an error, simple as that. We all know how it should be handled despite this religious devotion to RAW by some. (Which in case you've missed my subtle references is a complete waste of time.) :D

SiNNiX
19-09-2010, 02:14
Yeah, as much of a RAW dog (joke!) as I am, this is one of only a handful of things I'll go RAI with. Because, I mean, this is the most obvious typo I've ever seen.

Lord Inquisitor
19-09-2010, 02:32
Amusing. Analogous to the old "reduce armour save by -1" chestnut.

SiNNiX
19-09-2010, 02:45
Amusing. Analogous to the old "reduce armour save by -1" chestnut.

Ah, I remember that one. Good stuff.

D'Haran
19-09-2010, 14:23
lol great thread, unfortunately a double negative is only a positive in math, in common english (no matter how much I might disagree with it happening) a double negative is still a negative, unless of course the speaker is purposely using it to mean a positive. I am curious if there is the same ambiguity in the other language editions.

T10
19-09-2010, 14:59
Indeed. The colloquial phrase "you ain't got nothing" means "you have nothing", and not "you have everything". :)

-T10

knightwire
19-09-2010, 15:27
lol great thread, unfortunately a double negative is only a positive in math, in common english (no matter how much I might disagree with it happening) a double negative is still a negative, unless of course the speaker is purposely using it to mean a positive. I am curious if there is the same ambiguity in the other language editions.

Um what? Besides being completely wrong about double negatives in English (sort of), I'm not following how a "miss" is considered a negative? It's simply a single result from a set of two possible results. There is no positive or negative inference what-so-ever.

In the context of little men and dice rolling:
If you fail to hit someone, you've missed.
If you fail to miss someone, you've hit.

:) What a forum. :cool:


Indeed. The colloquial phrase "you ain't got nothing" means "you have nothing", and not "you have everything". :)

-T10

Double negatives (in English) can have a positive or negative meaning. It depends entirely on the the speaker's use. There is no hard and fast rule to them.

theunwantedbeing
19-09-2010, 15:37
There is no hard and fast rule to them.

Although a good rule is going off how well spoken they are.
The more well spoken, the more likely that double negative is a positive.

mishari26
19-09-2010, 20:23
"missing" is not a worthy objective in itself. therefor it's meaningless to try -and fail- to achieve it.

ergo, the adjective "failed" describing "misses" is nothing more than beautification and redundant speech.

see that miss? it was a horrible.. terrible.. shameful.. embarrassing.. failure of a swing of the sword -tsk tsk tsk- that elf should become a dark emo elf and cry over his shame and paint his face with black lipstick. :wtf:

oh and,.... apropos.

eyescrossed
20-09-2010, 04:43
No.

(10 character limit)

mishari26
20-09-2010, 05:38
(10 character limit)

that's more than 10 characters!

T10
20-09-2010, 08:58
It is!

-T10

eyescrossed
20-09-2010, 11:13
Well it's easier to type that than something so it equals 10 exactly :shifty: