wolf standard.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

It is being consistent, just not how you might intuitively feel it should be.

 

It's Friday night, did you write this drunk? My ENTIRE point is that the official GW answer butchers the English language. And you seemed to agree earlier calling the whole thing shaky. If the Wolf Standard works on die rolls, it should work on die rolls. Yet the GW FAQ answer claims a die roll is not a die roll, because sometimes two die rolls is really one die roll. That's not clear nor consistent. There is no defense for this, that much is obvious.

 

That has nothing to do with intuition. There is nothing to intuit. A GW employee dropped the ball with that imprecise and frankly stupid answer. Yammering on about "throws" (found no where in any of the cited language from GW) is you just trying to salvage GW's sloppy answer with additional terminology that you pulled out of your own noggin.

 

When I called it shakey, I was trying to show not that it is doesn't make sense, but that it isn't obvious to all people.

 

To be a bit cheeky, it does work on die rolls. It doesn't work on dice rolls ^_^

 

On the intuition thing, after playing RPG and TT games from the same companies for a while, you generally understand what they mean. I think Grey Mage has also been playing these games for a long time, and when I see that he has posted in the rules question forum, I am rarely surprised by what he has written.

You just kind of 'get it' after a while. I am not saying what GW writes is water-tight by any means, and like you, I wish they'd tighten it up. But they wont. Ever. :tu:

 

When I write about something using language that is not straight from GW, it is to help convey the concept. It would be nice if I could describe it just using the official language, but then again, if I could do that, maybe we'd never have these rules queries because GW had written a tight rules set.

 

Me trying to "salvage GW's sloppy answer" - by saying things or making up rules that are not true. No.

Me trying to "salvage GW's sloppy answer" - by saying it in a way that [hopefully] makes it clearer. Yes.

 

Well, hopefully I have written in a yammer free manner, and as I haven't been drinking at all today [it is 4:55 pm Saturday here in Koala land] or last night, this is all from my noggin, unassisted.

 

Ultimately, if you don't think you should re-roll the d6+1, that is fine. But I do try to only say people can have a rule "in their favour" [read: made clear] if I am sure of it. I'm not trying to give you a candy-apple just so you'll think I am a swell guy. :drool:

[Blarmb]

That particular ruling on what a "1" really is, is from the FAQ anyway, which is just soft content. It's a suggestion, not real rules. GWs statements on what the difference between FAQs/Erratas are make that pretty clear. It's a gray region of the rules that is fair to play either way.

[silverneil]

 

It is being consistent, just not how you might intuitively feel it should be.

 

One dice is rolled. It gives you one result.

 

Two dice are rolled. It gives you one result.

 

The one dice can roll a 1. Even if you add or subtract modifiers.

 

The two dice cannot roll a 1. One d6 is not modifying the other. They are one throw.

 

 

Nicely put. You should consider being a proof reader for Dex's and errata.

[Fred Johnson the 3rd jr]

To be a bit cheeky, it does work on die rolls. It doesn't work on dice rolls :lol:

 

It would be nice if I could describe it just using the official language, but then again, if I could do that, maybe we'd never have these rules queries because GW had written a tight rules set.

 

Us players have to make up stuff and fill in the blanks, because even with the FAQ GW bungles things up. I am really glad you have been admitting this, unlike some people.

 

Me trying to "salvage GW's sloppy answer" - by saying things or making up rules that are not true. No.

 

You are filling in gaps in the rules. Whether or not your addition gets closer to the true intention of the rules is a matter of debate. Also up for debate, is if the geniuses at GW even had a clear idea of what the rule should be.

 

Ultimately, if you don't think you should re-roll the d6+1, that is fine.

 

Since I play Space Wolves, I'd rather have the reroll. But it is IMHO more consistent to have to pick one of two options 1) Wolf Standard lets you reroll actual 1's wherever they are found when rolling dice even with a 2d6, 1d13+7 and a half etc; or 2) it only works when a a 1d6 is rolled because in all other options (2d6, 3d6, 1d6+whatever) an ultimate result of 1 cannot occur.

 

The half assed, let's have it work in some cases but not others, is what is not consistent, regardless of how much you protest. You can try to make it consistent by adding to and fixing GW's mess, but that doesn't mean it was consistent in the first place.

[Grey Mage]

Me trying to "salvage GW's sloppy answer" - by saying things or making up rules that are not true. No.

 

You are filling in gaps in the rules. Whether or not your addition gets closer to the true intention of the rules is a matter of debate. Also up for debate, is if the geniuses at GW even had a clear idea of what the rule should be.

 

Ultimately, if you don't think you should re-roll the d6+1, that is fine.

 

Since I play Space Wolves, I'd rather have the reroll. But it is IMHO more consistent to have to pick one of two options 1) Wolf Standard lets you reroll actual 1's wherever they are found when rolling dice even with a 2d6, 1d13+7 and a half etc; or 2) it only works when a a 1d6 is rolled because in all other options (2d6, 3d6, 1d6+whatever) an ultimate result of 1 cannot occur.

 

The half assed, let's have it work in some cases but not others, is what is not consistent, regardless of how much you protest. You can try to make it consistent by adding to and fixing GW's mess, but that doesn't mean it was consistent in the first place.

The rules are consistent.

 

1d6+1 includes a single die roll with a modifier. We care about the die roll.

 

2d6 is, as explained in the core book, considered a single die roll with the total given. If its 2d6+3, then the die roll would still be 2d6, and the modifier would be +3.

 

Heck, a roll of 1d6+scatter die, 2d6+scatter die or 3d6+scatter die are all considered to each be a single roll- because they are the random factor in our results.

 

Theres nothing confusing about this. The Wolf Standard consistantly allows you to have a second attempt at the random portion of your die roll, the d6 in most cases, if you roll a 1.

[ORKILL]

Me trying to "salvage GW's sloppy answer" - by saying things or making up rules that are not true. No.

 

You are filling in gaps in the rules. Whether or not your addition gets closer to the true intention of the rules is a matter of debate. Also up for debate, is if the geniuses at GW even had a clear idea of what the rule should be.

 

Ultimately, if you don't think you should re-roll the d6+1, that is fine.

 

Since I play Space Wolves, I'd rather have the reroll. But it is IMHO more consistent to have to pick one of two options 1) Wolf Standard lets you reroll actual 1's wherever they are found when rolling dice even with a 2d6, 1d13+7 and a half etc; or 2) it only works when a a 1d6 is rolled because in all other options (2d6, 3d6, 1d6+whatever) an ultimate result of 1 cannot occur.

 

The half assed, let's have it work in some cases but not others, is what is not consistent, regardless of how much you protest. You can try to make it consistent by adding to and fixing GW's mess, but that doesn't mean it was consistent in the first place.

The rules are consistent.

 

1d6+1 includes a single die roll with a modifier. We care about the die roll.

 

2d6 is, as explained in the core book, considered a single die roll with the total given. If its 2d6+3, then the die roll would still be 2d6, and the modifier would be +3.

 

Heck, a roll of 1d6+scatter die, 2d6+scatter die or 3d6+scatter die are all considered to each be a single roll- because they are the random factor in our results.

 

Theres nothing confusing about this. The Wolf Standard consistantly allows you to have a second attempt at the random portion of your die roll, the d6 in most cases, if you roll a 1.

,

I agree, it is pretty cut and dried.

[Grimtooth]

Me trying to "salvage GW's sloppy answer" - by saying things or making up rules that are not true. No.

 

You are filling in gaps in the rules. Whether or not your addition gets closer to the true intention of the rules is a matter of debate. Also up for debate, is if the geniuses at GW even had a clear idea of what the rule should be.

 

Ultimately, if you don't think you should re-roll the d6+1, that is fine.

 

Since I play Space Wolves, I'd rather have the reroll. But it is IMHO more consistent to have to pick one of two options 1) Wolf Standard lets you reroll actual 1's wherever they are found when rolling dice even with a 2d6, 1d13+7 and a half etc; or 2) it only works when a a 1d6 is rolled because in all other options (2d6, 3d6, 1d6+whatever) an ultimate result of 1 cannot occur.

 

The half assed, let's have it work in some cases but not others, is what is not consistent, regardless of how much you protest. You can try to make it consistent by adding to and fixing GW's mess, but that doesn't mean it was consistent in the first place.

The rules are consistent.

 

1d6+1 includes a single die roll with a modifier. We care about the die roll.

 

2d6 is, as explained in the core book, considered a single die roll with the total given. If its 2d6+3, then the die roll would still be 2d6, and the modifier would be +3.

 

Heck, a roll of 1d6+scatter die, 2d6+scatter die or 3d6+scatter die are all considered to each be a single roll- because they are the random factor in our results.

 

Theres nothing confusing about this. The Wolf Standard consistantly allows you to have a second attempt at the random portion of your die roll, the d6 in most cases, if you roll a 1.

 

This is pretty much what I was going to write with this monring's new posts.

 

There is a clear difference between 2d6 and 1d6+1.

 

The first result is taken as a whole. Rolling two 1's is not a die roll of two 1's. It is a roll of 2. The core rulebook supports this as does the faq.

 

The second result is not taken as a whole. You roll a result and then are given instructions for it to be modified by the value given. You have a 1 rolled and then add the modifier. The 1 was rolled, taken as a whole, and then modified.

[wolfpack]

Here we go again...because GW screwed the pooch on another rule we are gonna have a long drawn out debate...

 

SW DEX PAGE 62...and I quote...

 

"...Once per game, a unit that includes a wolf standard may call upon the power of the wolf. For the duration of the next Assault Phase, all models in the unit may re-roll any dice rolls of a 1."

 

now grammatically speaking this would mean that ALL die that are cast and show a result of one pip on the facing surface are re-rolled...as the wording does not single out one die but rather relates to ALL DICE...

 

now during an Assault phase...what various actions will cause a dice role?...hmmm...let's see

 

1 modifying the number of attacks (if Ragnar is included in a unit an additional +D3)

2 your to hit dice

3 your to wound dice

4 Saving throws to include invulnerable

5 Ldrship test

 

did I miss something??...

possibly this is only my second cup of java...

 

with the exception of the Ldrshp test which is covered in the FAQ none of the other items call for a multiple dice roll...i.e. 2D6,3D6 etc...so all other dice throws of a '1' would qualify under this rule

 

As for getting a proper response from GW...that is like asking a deaf man to hear or a blind man to see...the only response you will get is some morons half arsed attempt at reasoning through something he is more than likely ill equipped to handle...thus the nomer 'moron'...

 

and let's face it...if they had got it right the first time there wouldn't be a FAQ let alone any errata...but since they are 'dumbing down' the game there are going to be loop holes and inconsistencies to the rules...which there are in the FAQ as well...

 

I miss the good ole RT days when everything was covered and it was about the game and not the money... Ce la Vi

[Grey Mage]

now during an Assault phase...what various actions will cause a dice role?...hmmm...let's see

 

1 modifying the number of attacks (if Ragnar is included in a unit an additional +D3)

2 your to hit dice

3 your to wound dice

4 Saving throws to include invulnerable

5 Ldrship test

 

did I miss something??...

possibly this is only my second cup of java...

 

with the exception of the Ldrshp test which is covered in the FAQ none of the other items call for a multiple dice roll...i.e. 2D6,3D6 etc...so all other dice throws of a '1' would qualify under this rule

 

Leadership tests are a single die roll, and they cant come up a 1. Thats why its included in the FAQ.

[Fred Johnson the 3rd jr]

The rules are consistent.

 

No they aren't. The FAQ goes against the common sense and reasonable interpretation of the actual Wolf Standard rule. Listen, there is no need to defend GW and their nonsense. We all know they are not so good, to put it mildly, at being consistent. There is no sense pretending they are.

 

As long as you aren't playing a lunatic, or aren't one yourself, I am sure you and your opponent can agree, for the sake of playing a game, what a Wolf Standard allows rerolls on. Rock Paper Scissors, roll off, flip a coin, arm wrestle, whatever. Most of you are big boys who won't let this ruin your gaming day. But don't delude yourselves into thinking the information from GW is cut and dried.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

Nicely put. You should consider being a proof reader for Dex's and errata.

 

Thank you, you are too kind :lol:

[Grey Mage]

The rules are consistent.

 

No they aren't. The FAQ goes against the common sense and reasonable interpretation of the actual Wolf Standard rule. Listen, there is no need to defend GW and their nonsense. We all know they are not so good, to put it mildly, at being consistent. There is no sense pretending they are.

 

As long as you aren't playing a lunatic, or aren't one yourself, I am sure you and your opponent can agree, for the sake of playing a game, what a Wolf Standard allows rerolls on. Rock Paper Scissors, roll off, flip a coin, arm wrestle, whatever. Most of you are big boys who won't let this ruin your gaming day. But don't delude yourselves into thinking the information from GW is cut and dried.

Im not defending them, Im putting forth that just because they have crappy rules on occasion doesnt mean that this is one of those occaisions.

 

The 2d6 counts as a single die roll. If they were to change that for this instance it would be inconsistent, and stupid.

[Fred Johnson the 3rd jr]

Blerg. Give me a break dude. One I wasn't talking to you and two why did you feel the need to chime in yet again, just to repeat yourself? Are you obsessed with getting the last word? Do you take personal offense with anyone disagrees with you or something? No? Well then, what the hell was the point of your last message? We already went over this. Surely you have better things to do. I know I do, so go ahead and have your treasured last word if you must.

[Grey Mage]

Blerg. Give me a break dude. One I wasn't talking to you and two why did you feel the need to chime in yet again, just to repeat yourself? Are you obsessed with getting the last word? Do you take personal offense with anyone disagrees with you or something? No? Well then, what the hell was the point of your last message? We already went over this. Surely you have better things to do. I know I do, so go ahead and have your treasured last word if you must.

Fred, you came in after I had had my say, and decided to give the other opinion again- so I was defending my side in this debate just like it appeared you were. Perhaps you had missed my point, as you seemed to be barging ahead with your rant, and claimed I was defending the company instead of talking about rules. Is this a problem? Its fairly normal around this board to try to give clarification, I can assure you.

 

Of course, one thing Ive always been impressed with- and this further reinforces- is your level of maturity.

[silverneil]

Blerg. Give me a break dude. One I wasn't talking to you and two why did you feel the need to chime in yet again, just to repeat yourself? Are you obsessed with getting the last word? Do you take personal offense with anyone disagrees with you or something? No? Well then, what the hell was the point of your last message? We already went over this. Surely you have better things to do. I know I do, so go ahead and have your treasured last word if you must.

 

 

What or who is Blerg?

 

Mods requested to cast their eyes over this thread. We dont want it getting shut down because we can't be civil do we?

[littlbitz]

I am only going to step in this once.

 

I understand that the Wolf Lords of the Fang occasionally get passionate about our discussions.

 

That however, does not excuse snide remarks and rude comments when making your points.

[wolfpack]

now during an Assault phase...what various actions will cause a dice role?...hmmm...let's see

 

1 modifying the number of attacks (if Ragnar is included in a unit an additional +D3)

2 your to hit dice

3 your to wound dice

4 Saving throws to include invulnerable

5 Ldrship test

 

did I miss something??...

possibly this is only my second cup of java...

 

with the exception of the Ldrshp test which is covered in the FAQ none of the other items call for a multiple dice roll...i.e. 2D6,3D6 etc...so all other dice throws of a '1' would qualify under this rule

 

Leadership tests are a single die roll, and they cant come up a 1. Thats why its included in the FAQ.

 

a Ldrshp test is still the casting of MULTIPLE DICE...which is why I pointed out the 2D or 3D etc...and the fact that it was in the FAQ to alleviate the possibility of someone commenting on it ..GM...LOL