Re-rolling invulnerable saves

[Grey Mage]

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 :huh: 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.

This, is not true. The odds of a die coming up success or failure do not change the second time you roll it. The dice have no memory, and with the sum total of the roll being discarded, there is no increase or decrease statistically, or functionally.

 

Wound allocation doesnt change, no ones said anything about ignoring that, so I dont understand where your getting the 'moot point'.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

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.

 

They do cancel one another out.

 

One is a 'positive' re-roll. The other is a 'negative' re-roll.

0 +1 -1 is still 0. The 1s have cancelled one another to all intents and purposes.

 

12 dice rolled.

 

1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6

 

A]6 results get re-roll by the attacker.

B]6 results get re-rolled by the defender.

 

A's results. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

B's results. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

 

1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6.

Just as if you'd not ever re-rolled them for the successes AND for the failures.

 

If you and your buddy are happy to not re-roll them, no one gets hurt. It only doesn't work if you roll the dice, get better than average, AND THEN say let's not re-roll them.

 

You are just as likely to get the same spread of results without both sets of counter-balancing re-rolls happening. Honest.

 

Let's try it this way. We are rolling for a 4+ roll with any number of dice.

 

50% succeed. 50% fail.

The initial successes get re-rolled. 25% [of the total dice rolled initially] succeed. 25% fail.

The initial failures get re-rolled. 25% succeed. 25% fail.

 

Totals:

25+25 = 50% succeed.

25+25 = 50% fail.

 

Just as if you'd never re-rolled them.

 

Just to make sure it is not some anomaly with 50-50 things.

We are rolling for a 3+ roll with any number of dice.

 

66% succeed. 33% fail. Using 99% as the whole because decimals are pesky.

The initial successes get re-rolled. 44% [of the total dice rolled initially] succeed. 22% fail.

The initial failures get re-rolled. 22% succeed. 11% fail

 

Totals

44+22 = 66% succeed

22+11 = 33% fail.

 

Just as if you'd never re-rolled them.

 

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.

 

What you are saying here is not what the others were talking about unless I am mistaken....

[igotsmeakabob!!]

I'd say it but I've already been beaten to it...

Still, it should be said the chance of you rolling a 1 on a die after you've just rolled a 1 is still 1/6.

[Brother_Dan'l]

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.

That doesn't make any sense. You seem to be saying that since Fortune (re-roll failed) and the Executioner's Axe (re-roll successful) cancel out the Farseer gets his re-roll?! :drool: I'd understand neither forced re-roll taking effect...

[Arikel]

Hmm...the two separate re-rolls are somewhat intriguing. For example if i were to fail 9 saves and and get a chance to reroll those while my opponent got to reroll my 3 successful saves, i would definitely want to take the chance. Statistically over time it probably would make no difference, but my innate superstition would make me do it, and I'm sure my opponent would want to do the same thing if original roll was reversed (9 succeeded and 3 failed), this is why we all pray to the dice gods isn't it?

[Jakobus]

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.

That doesn't make any sense. You seem to be saying that since Fortune (re-roll failed) and the Executioner's Axe (re-roll successful) cancel out the Farseer gets his re-roll?! :) I'd understand neither forced re-roll taking effect...

 

The thing is that all the dice are being re-rolled after the initial armour save, Set A from Effect A and Set B from Effect B.

Fortune lets the failed saves to be re-roll, nothing can force this set of dice to be re-rolled. Null Zone/Astoraths Axe forces the successful saves to be re-rolled, nothing can force this set of dice to be re-rolled.

 

The "Cancelling out" just means that no single dice would not be re-rolled and because the is no 'memory' on the dice there is no real point to re-roll anything. By the rules you rolls the saves ignore what is on them and then roll them all again.

 

since Corbulo get to re-roll one dice he'd have no impact in an Astorath vs. Farseer fight. But without Astorath he could make the Eldar player take one of the successful saves and re-roll that with the rest of "Fortuned" saves.

[Legatus]

Hmm...the two separate re-rolls are somewhat intriguing. For example if i were to fail 9 saves and and get a chance to reroll those while my opponent got to reroll my 3 successful saves, i would definitely want to take the chance. Statistically over time it probably would make no difference, but my innate superstition would make me do it, and I'm sure my opponent would want to do the same thing if original roll was reversed (9 succeeded and 3 failed), this is why we all pray to the dice gods isn't it?

That is why you do not get to decide whether or not you re-roll everything after you have rolled the first batch. You either agree beforehand that you skip the first (and completely irrelevant) roll, or you proceed to roll a hand full of useless dice before actually rolling for real. You do not look at the first result and then decide whether to re-roll everything or not.

[Arikel]

"That is why you do not get to decide whether or not you re-roll everything after you have rolled the first batch. You either agree beforehand that you skip the first (and completely irrelevant) roll, or you proceed to roll a hand full of useless dice before actually rolling for real. You do not look at the first result and then decide whether to re-roll everything or not."

 

I'm not familiar enough with the abilities in question to tell you whether this would apply or not. If it is an ability that you can choose to use after you see the results of the roll, than you are certainly entitled to wait until you see how the first roll goes before electing to reroll or not.

[BladeEncarmine]

Except for Corbulo's reroll, all of the mentioned abilities (Fortune, the Executioner's Axe, Null Zone) state that you must use the reroll if possible.

 

Therefore, by actual RAW, if a Fortuned unit with invuln saves was then affected by Null Zone or hit in the face by Astorath the Grim, you would indeed roll all your saves, then reroll all failed saves (Fortune) and all successful invulnerable saves (Null Zone/Executioner's Axe)... which basically means you roll all the dice twice. As you can never reroll a reroll, the second result stands.

 

In practice, many players consider it a waste of time to roll all the dice twice and simply consider both abilities null because they effectively cancel each other out.

 

That said, it's important to be consisent in how you tackle this particular rules interaction. If you start a game by using the RAW method, then always use that method during your game. If you use the convenient method, stick to that for your game. That way, there can be no "gamesmanship" in deciding if you want the first result to stand or you want to try again with a reroll.

 

Personally, I always use the RAW method, as it helps keep everyone in my gaming group as clear as possible on the rules.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

I'm not familiar enough with the abilities in question to tell you whether this would apply or not. If it is an ability that you can choose to use after you see the results of the roll, than you are certainly entitled to wait until you see how the first roll goes before electing to reroll or not.

 

You don't get forced by any game rule to not re-roll by the others guys special powers. We are not talking about that.

 

We are saying that because a re-roll that is good for you AND a re-roll the is bad for you are happening at the same time over the initial set of rolls

 

they effectively cancel one another out. Before you roll the dice in the first place, you and your gaming buddy agree that the re-rolls cancel one another out [because, in effect, they do] and so you choose to NOT use either sides re-rolls.

Before you roll the dice.

 

Then just roll the initial dice.

 

And stand by those results, whether they are good or bad for the guy rolling them.

 

+++

 

If you are not getting what I am saying, that is cool.

Do it as normal.

Roll the dice initially. Re-roll fails once. Re-roll successes once.

 

What we are saying is the results you get by doing it this way, are just as likely as if you just rolled the dice initially. So you save yourself re-rolling, because it doesn't change anything.

[Legatus]

We are saying that because a re-roll that is good for you AND a re-roll the is bad for you are happening at the same time over the initial set of rolls

 

they effectively cancel one another out. Before you roll the dice in the first place, you and your gaming buddy agree that the re-rolls cancel one another out [because, in effect, they do] and so you choose to NOT use either sides re-rolls.

Before you roll the dice.

 

Then just roll the initial dice.

I would still rather put it as you omitting the initial roll and go straight to the "second" roll, as the initial roll is made entirely meaningless by the two rules forcing you to re-roll every single of the initial dice regardless of their result.