Null Field vs. Fortune

[tastytaste]

I am going to be facing a Eldar Seer council army soon. I will be using a Libby will Null Field. How do guys think it should work against reroll invul saves my opponent will surely do?

 

Or give me link to a thread if this topic has already been broached.

[Somar]

i think they would cancel each other out, kinda like the shadow of the warp (nid psi power) and the farseer thingy that lets him roll 3 dice and take the lowest.

[bystrom]

If I remember correctly, null field forces re-rolls on passed Inv Saves while fortune allows re-rolls on failed Inv Saves. So the player rolls his saves, then gets to re-roll his failed and his passed, which is all of them. So if you discuss with your opponent you can just agree that it cancels, as the way its played out in the rules, rolling all the saves twice and taking the second result just takes longer and doesn't give much.

[Grey Mage]

Since you cant reroll a reroll you can argue it one of two ways- you either reroll all the initial fails in one batch and all the initial success in another... or you can just cancel them out.

 

Though I suppose some would argue you dice off, on a 4+ you use one, on a 1-3 you use the other.

 

I advocate that they cancel each other out however, its simpler and makes sense.

[bystrom]

Since you cant reroll a reroll you can argue it one of two ways- you either reroll all the initial fails in one batch and all the initial success in another... or you can just cancel them out.

 

Though I suppose some would argue you dice off, on a 4+ you use one, on a 1-3 you use the other.

 

I advocate that they cancel each other out however, its simpler and makes sense.

 

 

What? You mean only one works? No offence meant in any way, but that sounds a bit funny... You're never re-rolling any re-rolls. You're re-rolling failed and you're re-rolling passed. I don't see any conflict, unless you're thinking that making a re-roll affects all the saves, and then you apply which part of the saves that are affected...

As for the re-rolling failed and passed, as long as you've agreed to a single convention, you'll never know wether the first rolls are better or the second rolls. So you're choosing between either taking longer time and sticking dogmatically to the rules or not.

[Spacefrisian]

They cancel each other.

[chapter master 454]

Just cancel them out, no point re-rolling ALL the dice again for now reason because all it does it an equal to the venerable rule. You could ether take less damage or more damage, You could argue however that is he ever FAILS ALL his saves then he re-rolls them and if he PASSES ALL his saves then re-roll them because then there would be a difference (since then only one power affects those rolls)

[waaanial00]

Cancel them out or if the opponent argues just get him to roll all the dice and then roll all the dice again without even looking at them. Once he/she sees how pointless the activity was I am sure that they will come round to your way of thinking.

 

Considering you will by virtue of both rules have to roll all dice twice you may as well roll it once and accept it or roll them all twice and accept it. I prefer the first option because it saves time :tu:

 

Wan

[Grey Mage]

Since you cant reroll a reroll you can argue it one of two ways- you either reroll all the initial fails in one batch and all the initial success in another... or you can just cancel them out.

 

Though I suppose some would argue you dice off, on a 4+ you use one, on a 1-3 you use the other.

 

I advocate that they cancel each other out however, its simpler and makes sense.

 

 

What? You mean only one works? No offence meant in any way, but that sounds a bit funny... You're never re-rolling any re-rolls. You're re-rolling failed and you're re-rolling passed. I don't see any conflict, unless you're thinking that making a re-roll affects all the saves, and then you apply which part of the saves that are affected...

As for the re-rolling failed and passed, as long as you've agreed to a single convention, you'll never know wether the first rolls are better or the second rolls. So you're choosing between either taking longer time and sticking dogmatically to the rules or not.

No no... when two rules are in conflict its been a long standing tradition that you roll off to see wich one takes precedence thats all. Some people may wish to do this.

 

For instance in WFB theres a rule where you always strikes first, wich comes in conflict with an item that causes your enemy always strikes last, even after I 1. When these two abilities are in conflict you roll a die, 4+ going to the benefit of the designated roller.

 

Its not the way that I personally advocate, but its been espoused in GW materials and Ive seen it happen at tournies.

[Legatus]

But his point was that the two rules are not affecting how each other works. If you rolled 6 saves and passed 4 but failed 2, the null field would make you pick up and roll the 4 passes again, while fortune would make you pick up and roll the 2 fails again. You can still act according to both rules and re-roll all the passes and all the saves. None pf the rules is affected and works any different than when it would be the only rule in play.

[Koremu]

There is no rule conflict. Fortune allows the Eldar player to reroll all his failed saves. Null zone allows you to force him to reroll his successful ones. Since no dice can be rerolled more than once regardless of source, the initial roll is made, all of the dice are rerolled and then the result is taken.

 

Or you can save time and just do the one roll.

 

To answer the underlying point of the question, yes a Librarian with Null Zone is a good idea when facing a seer council, not just for Null Zone but also for the Psychic Hood.

[Night Stalker]

Since you cant reroll a reroll you can argue it one of two ways- you either reroll all the initial fails in one batch and all the initial success in another... or you can just cancel them out.

 

Though I suppose some would argue you dice off, on a 4+ you use one, on a 1-3 you use the other.

 

I advocate that they cancel each other out however, its simpler and makes sense.

 

 

What? You mean only one works? No offence meant in any way, but that sounds a bit funny... You're never re-rolling any re-rolls. You're re-rolling failed and you're re-rolling passed. I don't see any conflict, unless you're thinking that making a re-roll affects all the saves, and then you apply which part of the saves that are affected...

As for the re-rolling failed and passed, as long as you've agreed to a single convention, you'll never know wether the first rolls are better or the second rolls. So you're choosing between either taking longer time and sticking dogmatically to the rules or not.

No no... when two rules are in conflict its been a long standing tradition that you roll off to see wich one takes precedence thats all. Some people may wish to do this.

 

For instance in WFB theres a rule where you always strikes first, wich comes in conflict with an item that causes your enemy always strikes last, even after I 1. When these two abilities are in conflict you roll a die, 4+ going to the benefit of the designated roller.

 

Its not the way that I personally advocate, but its been espoused in GW materials and Ive seen it happen at tournies.

Those two rules are not in conflict. One affect failed saves, second affect passed saves. No re-rolling re-rolls means there is no chance for conflict.

 

You roll once, then re-roll all dices and apply second roll. Just as those rules work. NO CONFLICT.

[Aarhus]

*blinks* This never would've happened in 3rd ed.

5th ed. speeds up the game, eh?

 

 

Cheers,

Lawrence.

[templargdt]

Where does it say that dice can't be rerolled more than once? I've never heard that rule?

[Night Stalker]

Where does it say that dice can't be rerolled more than once? I've never heard that rule?

Then read main rulebook again.

[Koremu]

Where does it say that dice can't be rerolled more than once? I've never heard that rule?

Page 2 of the rulebook.

[Bigger-than-Jesus]

In fantasy, there's a rule that allows re-rolling failed to hit rolls in HtH(hatred). Chaos has a suit of magic armour that forces your enemy to re-roll successful to hit rolls in HtH. In that case you re-roll the misses, then re-roll ALL hits, regardless of it's already been re-rolled. I'd apply that here too.

[Koremu]

In fantasy, there's a rule that allows re-rolling failed to hit rolls in HtH(hatred). Chaos has a suit of magic armour that forces your enemy to re-roll successful to hit rolls in HtH. In that case you re-roll the misses, then re-roll ALL hits, regardless of it's already been re-rolled. I'd apply that here too.

And you would be wrong. You can never re-roll a dice more than once. Never. Like model attributes going over 10, it cannot happen.

[Somar]

alright, lemme get this straight. some of you think the saves should be made, then the successful ones and the failed ones (in effect all) dice should be re-rolled?

that is about the dumbest thing i have ever heard. why not pick up all the dice and say: well, lets assume i rolled half 1s and half 6es with the first roll, here goes the re-roll?

or just agree on the two abilities CANCELING EACH OTHER OUT!

[Koremu]

That's what any reasonable person would of course do. But if you want to get down to technicalities, then re-rolling everything is what should happen.

[Brother SRM]

GW official ruling declares a die can only be rerolled once. Just skip the silliness and have the two powers cancel each other out.

[the jeske]

or just agree on the two abilities CANCELING EACH OTHER OUT!

because in w40k you cant do that. you are forced to roll everytime , you cant say I dont wont to roll this or that [it would end as exploits in the end ].

[Legatus]

Well, I think if you know in advance that the roll you are going to make will not count in any way, you can go ahead and skip it alltogether. As long as you declare before you roll that you are only doing the "re-roll" to your enemy, so that you can then not suddenly decide you would rather roll again because of a crappy result.

[Night Stalker]

GW official ruling declares a die can only be rerolled once. Just skip the silliness and have the two powers cancel each other out.

It's not ruling. It's the rule. And the powers does not cancel each other. They are unaffected by each other.

 

You roll once, take the dices back, and roll again. Thats it. You can ask your opponent if you/he can roll only once, and apply his choice. Thats it.

[Koremu]

Oh indeed, make sure it is clear what dice you are rolling before you roll them, I agree. But then, when is that not the rule? Doesn't everyone state the roll out loud as they pick up the dice?