Fortune vs Nullzone

[LardO'Blood]

Okay, so I am playing against Eldar.

Eldrad fortunes up a squad of harlequins. My librarian null zones, my assault terminators charge his squad of harlequins. The 5 man squad takes 5 wounds from my assault terminators. Let's say he fails 2 invulnerable saves. Does he reroll all his saves? (2 failed saves from fortune and 3 passed saves from nullzone)

[nurglez]

basically, yes. remember you can only reroll a dice once, you could also just play it that they cancel each other out, as no matter what the result is, it would have to be rerolled...

[Seahawk]

Yes, you roll all the results twice. Anything else does not constitute playing the game correctly (ie, by the rules).

[greatcrusade08]

i hear alot of talk about discounting the re-rolls to save time, but as seahawk says it isnt playing by the rules and since each roll is completely random and independant of every other roll.. not re-rolling could give anomolous results..

[nurglez]

I agree that you need to roll then reroll, just said that some people might not reroll to save tome (but i love rolling dice, thats why i play!)

[Seahawk]

You don't actually save an appreciable amount of time by not rerolling (one second or less), so I don't feel it's a good enough excuse for laziness ;) :)

[Grey Mage]

i hear alot of talk about discounting the re-rolls to save time, but as seahawk says it isnt playing by the rules and since each roll is completely random and independant of every other roll.. not re-rolling could give anomolous results..

No more anomalous than than rolling them twice.

 

As you noted, its entirely independant- it does not become more consistant by rolling them a second time.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

Okay, so I am playing against Eldar.

Eldrad fortunes up a squad of harlequins. My librarian null zones, my assault terminators charge his squad of harlequins. The 5 man squad takes 5 wounds from my assault terminators. Let's say he fails 2 invulnerable saves. Does he reroll all his saves? (2 failed saves from fortune and 3 passed saves from nullzone)

 

Yeah you have it.

The failed saves get Fortune'd and cannot be rolled again

The passed saves get Nullzone'd and cannot be rolled again

 

But if nothing got re-rolled, and you were clear about it before you made the initial roll, you could just roll the dice once and those results are just as valid as doing it 'by the book'

Some people get confused by it and think you are pulling a swift one, so for the sake of those guys, just do it by the book.

[Hellios]

Okay, so I am playing against Eldar.

Eldrad fortunes up a squad of harlequins. My librarian null zones, my assault terminators charge his squad of harlequins. The 5 man squad takes 5 wounds from my assault terminators. Let's say he fails 2 invulnerable saves. Does he reroll all his saves? (2 failed saves from fortune and 3 passed saves from nullzone)

 

Yeah you have it.

The failed saves get Fortune'd and cannot be rolled again

The passed saves get Nullzone'd and cannot be rolled again

 

But if nothing got re-rolled, and you were clear about it before you made the initial roll, you could just roll the dice once and those results are just as valid as doing it 'by the book'

Some people get confused by it and think you are pulling a swift one, so for the sake of those guys, just do it by the book.

 

I agree in this case if you've agreed beforehand and everyone is clear it would be acceptable not to re-roll. If you want to be safe and play strictly by the rules then re-roll.

[greatcrusade08]

i hear alot of talk about discounting the re-rolls to save time, but as seahawk says it isnt playing by the rules and since each roll is completely random and independant of every other roll.. not re-rolling could give anomolous results..

No more anomalous than than rolling them twice.

 

As you noted, its entirely independant- it does not become more consistant by rolling them a second time.

 

my argument is not that one roll affects the other, but the first roll gives a snapshot into what could happen.. if you have to roll twice its the second roll that counts not the first.. and since randomness affects each roll as if its in a vacuum then the different results each roll gives can be very anomolous..

 

one roll doesnt affect the other until you have results, at which point you have a frame of reference..

I agree with seahawk, rather than argue that it saves time just re-roll the dice, it saves time over arguing your RAI case over the tabletop

[Sparhawk]

Rolling once and then picking everything up and rolling again is playing it RAW. Just to be clear however, there is no actual statistical difference between rolling once and then rolling again. Since dice are memoryless the odds of any number appearing on any given die remain exactly the same thereby rendering the first roll entirely superfluous. Whether you choose to do the re-roll or to just go with the first roll only just make sure that you do it consistently during a game.

 

I'm only bringing this up because I had a game against a guy who truly believed that a die was more likely to roll higher if a low number was present, this wasn't a vagaries of the dice gods thing either but he thought that math backed that up...

[gecko-artist]

If I may be so bold....

I play against Eldrad frequently and since Fortune allows rerolls of failed saves and NZ forces rerolls of successfull saves. Rather than just rolling the dice and then picking them up and re-rolling all of them a second time. We play that the dice are rolled and then all of the failed saves are re-rolled via fortune and the initial successfull saves are re-rolled seperately due to NZ.

[Seahawk]

Is that not the same exact process? :confused: You're picking up all the dice to roll again in both cases.

[Sparhawk]

Which is the same as rolling once and being done with it.

[Grey Mage]

If I may be so bold....

I play against Eldrad frequently and since Fortune allows rerolls of failed saves and NZ forces rerolls of successfull saves. Rather than just rolling the dice and then picking them up and re-rolling all of them a second time. We play that the dice are rolled and then all of the failed saves are re-rolled via fortune and the initial successfull saves are re-rolled seperately due to NZ.

Thats exactly the same as just rerolling all the dice at once.

 

You roll 15 saves- 11 succeed, 4 fail.

 

You roll the 4 fails, get 3 sucesses and 1 fail. You roll the even 11 successful, get 7 successes and 4 fails.

 

Thats exactly the same as if you picked up the whole 15 and rolled again getting 10 successes and 5 fails. That you rolled them together or seperately had no bearing on what statistcally will happen.

 

That were even having a debate about this is a bit silly though.

[gecko-artist]

It's not quite the same thing..... though I suppose in the simplest terms it is. Just rolling, picking it all up and rolling again, does skew the probabilities and statistics of this specific instance as every die roll is random and as stated before there is no dice memory. So throwing out the first roll entirely and just rolling again is redundant. However, re-rolling the failed saves specifically for those dice to make your save, or vice versa does change things. If your initial roll was 4 failed saves and 1 successfull - you have a higher probability of having more successfull saves as you are re-rolling 4 to 1 to be successfull. See?

[Grey Mage]

Nope.

 

Because on each die, wether you roll 5, 50, or 50,000 dice, will have a ~16.5% of rolling any given number.

 

If you roll it in a batch of 7 and a batch of 8 you have not changed the statistics on the 15 dice you have rolled in the least.

 

Edit: note, your correct in a way. If we were ONLY rerolling part of the dice pool what your talking about would in fact skew the stats- thats the power of rerolls. But wether you do it whole or in parts you are in this case rerolling ALL of them. Nothing changes in this case at all.