Re-rolling invulnerable saves

[mercury]

I am playing in a Blood Angels mirror match, and Astorath takes the final wound from my Chaplain. I fail my invulnerable save, but decide to use Corbulo's ability to re-roll the save, passing on the second attempt.

 

Do I then need to re-roll the (now successful) save again due to the special rule of Astorath's axe, or does the standard GW mantra of 'you cannot re-roll a re-roll' come into effect?

 

I (of course) would argue that I do not need to roll the save again, but it seems like a rather dubious way of by-passing Astorath's special ability, and I'm pretty sure that the 'you cannot re-roll a re-roll' concept is intended to stop people from repeating the same roll until they pass it.

 

Are there any exceptions to the normal rule i.e. must you re-roll a re-roll if your opponent has an ability which forces you to do so?

[dswanick]

RE-ROLLS & ROLL-OFFS - Re-rolls - This is exactly as it sounds - pick up the dice you wish to re-roll and roll them again. The second score counts, even if it means a worse result than the first, and no single dice can be re-rolled more than once regardless of the source of the re-roll.

Strange, odd, wonky - yep this is a GW rule. :D

I think I'll suggest a house rule at my next game group get together - "no single dice may be re-rolled by the same player more than once, regardless of the source of the re-roll". That way I can use my re-roll to make a failed save, and my opponent can use his re-roll to fail my made save and neither of us can re-roll re-rolls.

[Grey Mage]

You cannot reroll a reroll.

 

A common compromise in these situations is that you use the origional result when forced with two seperate rerolls. However, his ability doesnt kick in tell after youve used your reroll... so Id just leave it as is.

[Chengar Qordath]

As I recall, the general rule is that if you have two contradictory re-roll rules, like rule to re-roll successful invunlerable saves due to Null Zone (or Astorath's axe), while the Fortune ability allows re-rolls on failed saves, then the two abilities cancel each other out and the re-roll is taken as normal. Not sure if that's the official GW position, or just a widely used fan rule though.

 

Not sure if that general rule would apply with Corbulo's ability since it's a bit different, but I would be inclined to follow the same principle of good re-roll and bad re-roll canceling each other out.

[mercury]

@dswanick: I agree with you, but unfortunately the result is an angry opponent, since I've just applied RAW to negate an ability he rarely gets to use!

 

As I recall, the general rule is that if you have two contradictory re-roll rules, like rule to re-roll successful invunlerable saves due to Null Zone (or Astorath's axe), while the Fortune ability allows re-rolls on failed saves, then the two abilities cancel each other out and the re-roll is taken as normal. Not sure if that's the official GW position, or just a widely used fan rule though.

 

Not sure I agree with this at all. If an Eldar player passes an invulnerable save, and Astorath forces a re-roll which fails, surely the result = wound taken. Fortune would not allow a further re-roll (due to the core rule) and in no way cancels out Astorath's ability.

 

In my situation, had I passed my first invulnerable save, Astorath would have forced me to re-roll it. If I failed the re-roll, then I could not use Corbulo to roll the dice again (fair enough), nor could I have used Corbulo's ability to cancel out Astorath's.

[Hellios]

@dswanick: I agree with you, but unfortunately the result is an angry opponent, since I've just applied RAW to negate an ability he rarely gets to use!

 

As I recall, the general rule is that if you have two contradictory re-roll rules, like rule to re-roll successful invunlerable saves due to Null Zone (or Astorath's axe), while the Fortune ability allows re-rolls on failed saves, then the two abilities cancel each other out and the re-roll is taken as normal. Not sure if that's the official GW position, or just a widely used fan rule though.

 

Not sure I agree with this at all. If an Eldar player passes an invulnerable save, and Astorath forces a re-roll which fails, surely the result = wound taken. Fortune would not allow a further re-roll (due to the core rule) and in no way cancels out Astorath's ability.

 

In my situation, had I passed my first invulnerable save, Astorath would have forced me to re-roll it. If I failed the re-roll, then I could not use Corbulo to roll the dice again (fair enough), nor could I have used Corbulo's ability to cancel out Astorath's.

 

Well I may be wrong Gw may not have FAQ'ed this but Eldar have a thing that allows you to take a psychic test on 3D6 pick the lowest... while Tyranids (?) had something where you roll 3d6 and pick the highest... they both cancelled each other out... but that is because they both take effect at the same time...

 

Now with this save Lets take Asteroth(Sp?) and Fortune as an example... one allows re-rolls when you fail the causes a re-roll when you pass... both happen in different events... so in this case ideally you want to fail your first save which allows fortune to kick in and pass the save... all good (a few examples of this kind of thing can happen with a number of codices)... However if you pass your save and then fail from the forced re-roll to bad... I compare this to fortuned eldar psykers who fail ghost helm saves and then pass an invulnerable save for perils of the warp and so have to re-roll, if they fail the re-roll they cannot use fortune to re-roll that re-roll.

 

I hope this helps :D

[Grey Mage]

@dswanick: I agree with you, but unfortunately the result is an angry opponent, since I've just applied RAW to negate an ability he rarely gets to use!

 

As I recall, the general rule is that if you have two contradictory re-roll rules, like rule to re-roll successful invunlerable saves due to Null Zone (or Astorath's axe), while the Fortune ability allows re-rolls on failed saves, then the two abilities cancel each other out and the re-roll is taken as normal. Not sure if that's the official GW position, or just a widely used fan rule though.

 

Not sure I agree with this at all. If an Eldar player passes an invulnerable save, and Astorath forces a re-roll which fails, surely the result = wound taken. Fortune would not allow a further re-roll (due to the core rule) and in no way cancels out Astorath's ability.

 

In my situation, had I passed my first invulnerable save, Astorath would have forced me to re-roll it. If I failed the re-roll, then I could not use Corbulo to roll the dice again (fair enough), nor could I have used Corbulo's ability to cancel out Astorath's.

Astoroth wounds + Fortune- You roll all the dice. You pick them all up and roll them again. *because you have to reroll all the failed and all the successful saves*

 

What do most people do? Just roll it once.

 

In your case- you used your special once a game reroll... and the die has been rerolled. Astoroth cannot make you reroll it again.

 

As you said, if it was the other way around you couldnt use the priests reroll on your chaplain because it had already been rerolled. It just depends on whose reroll kicks in first since, unlike with fortune, they dont kick in simultaneously.

[dswanick]

@dswanick: I agree with you, but unfortunately the result is an angry opponent, since I've just applied RAW to negate an ability he rarely gets to use!

 

As I recall, the general rule is that if you have two contradictory re-roll rules, like rule to re-roll successful invunlerable saves due to Null Zone (or Astorath's axe), while the Fortune ability allows re-rolls on failed saves, then the two abilities cancel each other out and the re-roll is taken as normal. Not sure if that's the official GW position, or just a widely used fan rule though.

 

Not sure I agree with this at all. If an Eldar player passes an invulnerable save, and Astorath forces a re-roll which fails, surely the result = wound taken. Fortune would not allow a further re-roll (due to the core rule) and in no way cancels out Astorath's ability.

 

In my situation, had I passed my first invulnerable save, Astorath would have forced me to re-roll it. If I failed the re-roll, then I could not use Corbulo to roll the dice again (fair enough), nor could I have used Corbulo's ability to cancel out Astorath's.

That's why I like my one re-roll per player idea. The owning player gets a chance to make a roll he failed, and the opponent gets a chance to force a fail on a successful roll. It doesn't guaranty that either player will get the result he wants, it just gives them the chance that they would have from their roll without an opponent nulling their rule. Then each player has to decide if the use is worth it in game terms.

[Rik Lightstar]

Surely in essence you roll your saves for example 6 dice on power armour and get 2,2,4,5,5,6 as you get to reroll failed rolls and have to reroll the passed rolls too you pick up ALL 6 dice at the same time and roll again. No rerolls can be rerolled so the second result stands, SIMPLES!

[ShinyRhino]

Surely in essence you roll your saves for example 6 dice on power armour and get 2,2,4,5,5,6 as you get to reroll failed rolls and have to reroll the passed rolls too you pick up ALL 6 dice at the same time and roll again. No rerolls can be rerolled so the second result stands, SIMPLES!

 

Or, as has been said, just use the first result, since you're rolling a full set of dice for absolutely no outcome, value, or reason, eh? :D

[Seahawk]

The problem with just using the first one is that you must be consistent. If you get good rolling the first time and let it be, the next time when you roll poorly you'll want those rerolls...but can't get them, which then is not following the rules. The first roll is for S&G to see what could've happened, not what will happen :cuss.

[JamesI]

The problem with just using the first one is that you must be consistent. If you get good rolling the first time and let it be, the next time when you roll poorly you'll want those rerolls...but can't get them, which then is not following the rules. The first roll is for S&G to see what could've happened, not what will happen .

I haven't run into it yet, but eventually I will since I run Astorath. When I know that can happen, I'll talk to my opponent before the game and decide then, before any dice are thrown, how we will handle it. For simplicity if we get to a situation where all successes are rerolled and all fails are rerolled, I vote for roll one set and whatever it says goes.

[trefenwyd]

Grey Mage and Lightstar are correct. Rhino/James, your idea of leaving the first result stand is also fine, but you either need to make a shop/house rule or talk about it before every game. Our shop runs the "roll all the dice, pick up all the dice and roll them all again" version just to footstomp that we're adhering to both unit's special rules.

 

Dswanick, I agree your idea makes sense, but treating the situation with RAW works perfectly well - one unit gets "screwed" by not being able to use their re-roll but 1) that's decided by a dice roll (the initial success/fail), with the opponent then getting one chance to overturn that result and 2) they only get "screwed" if they succeeded on the dice roll. Seems like that's fair - Whatever the result, one chance to overturn.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

I am playing in a Blood Angels mirror match, and Astorath takes the final wound from my Chaplain. I fail my invulnerable save, but decide to use Corbulo's ability to re-roll the save, passing on the second attempt.

 

Do I then need to re-roll the (now successful) save again due to the special rule of Astorath's axe, or does the standard GW mantra of 'you cannot re-roll a re-roll' come into effect?

 

I (of course) would argue that I do not need to roll the save again, but it seems like a rather dubious way of by-passing Astorath's special ability, and I'm pretty sure that the 'you cannot re-roll a re-roll' concept is intended to stop people from repeating the same roll until they pass it.

 

Are there any exceptions to the normal rule i.e. must you re-roll a re-roll if your opponent has an ability which forces you to do so?

 

First in best dressed.

You have re-rolled once, and that is it.

 

It's not dubious, it is the rules.

People need to stop projecting what they think it should be and just follow them :)

[Kapitalist-Pig]

I actually think that the re-rolls for the two dfferent reasons would need to be rolled seperatly. Here is my reasoning. You roll your 6 Invul saves, and get 1,2,3,4,5,6. When you pick up the dice for Astoraths axe, you are picking up passed Invul save rolls 4,5,6 (this is now it's own subtype of roll) and when you pick up the failed 1,2,3 (own subtype of roll) you are now picking up two different types of rolls. Now you have to see if the failed rolls save, and if the passed ones save again.

 

I know it sounds kind of confusing but it seems like it works to me. Since you now have to pick up two different types of rolls they are now type different rolls.

 

 

Or this is completely useless. Either way hopes this makes sense to anyone else. (Oh I should not stay up so late.) :)

[Legatus]

You have to re-roll the dice for different reasons, but the outcome of each roll is still the same, i.e. the number you have to roll is the same and each failed roll means a caused wound. So they really do not need to be rolled separately.

[greatcrusade08]

The problem with just using the first one is that you must be consistent. If you get good rolling the first time and let it be, the next time when you roll poorly you'll want those rerolls...but can't get them, which then is not following the rules. The first roll is for S&G to see what could've happened, not what will happen :).

 

i had this argument on a different forum and got flamed ALOT..

the rules say you have to re-roll both failed and successful saves.. some people think its ok to 'cancel' out and roll just once, but as seahawk has pointed out it can lead to problems..

before the dice are rolled its all random the odds/chances/percentages are the same for roll one as roll two.. but once you roll that first set of dice it open the situation to anomolous results.

 

as soon as you have a set of results to compare to, the second set carries more 'meaning' than basic mathhammer.

 

so although cancelling does save time, its not a game effecting amount of time.. and since the rules say to re-roll them, by not doing so you leave yourself open to arguments.

 

as a secondary argument what if you failed ALL saves or passed ALL saves, you cant then cancel out, becuase only one of the rules is coming into effect

[Sparhawk]

I just wanted to make sure that everyone was aware that there is no statistical difference between the first set of rolls and a second set of rolls. The dice are memoryless and as such always have the same probability of rolling any of the numbers no matter what their current state is. I know most people understand this but I also know quite a few people that believe that think dice can remeber.

[Legatus]

It of course has to be clear before the first roll is taken whether or not you are doing the re-rolls (basically rolling an irrelevant batch first before actually rolling for real) or whether you agree to omit the irrelevant first roll. Rolling the first batch and then deciding whether or not to re-roll all the dice is a big no-no!

 

 

as a secondary argument what if you failed ALL saves or passed ALL saves, you cant then cancel out, becuase only one of the rules is coming into effect

The procedure is still the same. The first roll is ignored, and you roll everything again. It is of no consequence whether you re-roll every die because of one rule of because of two rules being in effect. Not a single die of the first roll counts and you have to re-roll every single one of them, no matter the first outcome.

[greatcrusade08]

as a secondary argument what if you failed ALL saves or passed ALL saves, you cant then cancel out, becuase only one of the rules is coming into effect

The procedure is still the same. The first roll is ignored, and you roll everything again. It is of no consequence whether you re-roll every die because of one rule of because of two rules being in effect. Not a single die of the first roll counts and you have to re-roll every single one of them, no matter the first outcome.

 

yes, but no-one can argue that you should ignore the re-roll.. in the case of it being only a single rule youd be cheating someone by not following the rules..

[Kapitalist-Pig]

Lets get back to basics. When you only have one rule that makes you re-roll dice, you only pick up the ones that you choose to re-roll. In most cases (not all) it is a failed roll that you pick up and re-roll. What I was saying in my earlier comment was that once you have rolled the first time, as with every time you roll, you seperate the successes and failed rolls. At this point you would re-roll the failed leaving the successes to the side. Then you would add the just re-rolled successes to the passed batch.

 

 

In this instance you have two different rules requiring you to re-roll different batches of dice. At this point when you seperate the passed and failed rolls they are now thier own group of dice that have been rolled. When you go to roll all of them together you have in fact mixed your results. Astorath's axe, tells you to only re-roll the passed invul saves. While fortune or whatever (I don't know for sure) tells you to only re-roll failed saves. At this point you need to seperate the results of the first roll and roll the two groups seperate. Knowing that you can only re-roll dice once after both of the results have been re-rolled (seperately) you combine the results like the first. Those that are saying you just pick up the all the dice and re-roll, while I see your point for simplicity sake have a problem, since the two different rules are in fact calling for different sets of dice to be re-rolled you must in order to fulfill both rules break it down into the subsect, or batch results. Maybe this is a little more clear then before.

[Grey Mage]

Lets get back to basics. When you only have one rule that makes you re-roll dice, you only pick up the ones that you choose to re-roll. In most cases (not all) it is a failed roll that you pick up and re-roll. What I was saying in my earlier comment was that once you have rolled the first time, as with every time you roll, you seperate the successes and failed rolls. At this point you would re-roll the failed leaving the successes to the side. Then you would add the just re-rolled successes to the passed batch.

 

 

In this instance you have two different rules requiring you to re-roll different batches of dice. At this point when you seperate the passed and failed rolls they are now thier own group of dice that have been rolled. When you go to roll all of them together you have in fact mixed your results. Astorath's axe, tells you to only re-roll the passed invul saves. While fortune or whatever (I don't know for sure) tells you to only re-roll failed saves. At this point you need to seperate the results of the first roll and roll the two groups seperate. Knowing that you can only re-roll dice once after both of the results have been re-rolled (seperately) you combine the results like the first. Those that are saying you just pick up the all the dice and re-roll, while I see your point for simplicity sake have a problem, since the two different rules are in fact calling for different sets of dice to be re-rolled you must in order to fulfill both rules break it down into the subsect, or batch results. Maybe this is a little more clear then before.

It is more clear.

 

It is just as nonsensical.

 

Your are saying that, for the sake of clarity, you should roll, seperate the results, and then roll each pile again.

 

As opposed to just picking them all up, an rolling them again.

 

Theres nothing in the RAW that says you need to seperate the results- the placement of your dice doesnt have an intrinsic value to it. If your opponent knows whats going on, and they should since youve been talking to them, theres no difference between rolling them twice as one group and rolling each die twice but in three groups. None.

 

If, for whatever reason, your opponent does NOT know whats going on, your seperating the piles and rerolling them will not clear up the situation. What you need is clear verbal communication of the situation and a brief discussion of the rules involved.

[Jakobus]

If this was with a friend I'm sure that we'd probably just roll all invunerable saves once

In a tournement setting, it would probably end up being easier and save the headache to roll the first set seperate them out and then re-roll all the in two batches. Its not the time or place to have a 'discussion' on probability and all that :cuss

All of the dice will be re-rolled, but only re-rolled once as per the BRB.

 

So Astorath hits and wounds 5 times against a Fortuned Farseer and Warlocks.

The Eldar player rolls 3 saves and 2 fails. Astorath forces the 3 saves to be rerolled and then Fortune allows the Eldar player to reoll the 2 failed saves. And here we are rolling 5 saves again.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

I actually think that the re-rolls for the two dfferent reasons would need to be rolled seperatly. Here is my reasoning. You roll your 6 Invul saves, and get 1,2,3,4,5,6. When you pick up the dice for Astoraths axe, you are picking up passed Invul save rolls 4,5,6 (this is now it's own subtype of roll) and when you pick up the failed 1,2,3 (own subtype of roll) you are now picking up two different types of rolls. Now you have to see if the failed rolls save, and if the passed ones save again.

 

I know it sounds kind of confusing but it seems like it works to me. Since you now have to pick up two different types of rolls they are now type different rolls.

 

You are supposed to do it how you have called it. I do it this way.

 

But people are quite rightly saying that because a positive re-roll and negative re-roll are is effect, they do cancel one another out.

 

Therefore rolling it once and not re-rolling successes and not re-rolling fails will give you the same result as when

 

you roll initially, re-roll initial successes, re-roll initial fails.

 

But just so people don't feel jipped or short changed [or don't understand that they counter-balance one another] just do it the way you have said you do it.

[Kapitalist-Pig]

Actually, they do not counter each other out. They are targeting (or allowing) the dice which are effected by the axe, or fortune to be re-rolled. There is a difference here. People who are saying just pick them all up (I understand simplicity and speed) are missing the function of both rules. They do not say pick up all dice, they specificly call out a certain criteria for which dice to pick up and re-roll. When you are forced to re-roll dice that are passes, and picking up dice that are failed at the same time you are fulfilling both rules, but also breaking both rules. I say this because you are picking up and re-rolling dice that are not targeted by the specific rule that is requiring you to re-roll and allowing you to re-roll.

 

Also, when you are saying they cancel each other out, you are making an assumption they are targeting the same dice. When in fact both of them target seperate groups. Therefor, making it wrong to just roll once and go with it. You are in that case ignoring both rules.

 

When you are do an action that has very specific things, like re-rolling all passed invul saves, you must only roll those that are passed. Wound allocation at this point would become a moot point if you just pick them all up and re-roll. Each die that is rolled has an intrinsic value once it has been rolled. At that point you are either A) short changing yourself in the odds that you will pass the same or more saves, or :) short changing your oppenent by speed rolling dice that are not the same. I get that you see that they have the same value in the end so what does it matter. It matters because there are two different rules that are being applied to two different things.