Re-roll oddities misinterpretation

[Captain Idaho]

It appears the internet reviews are frequently getting 2 of our Strategums wrong in the review. They're actually 2 of the strongest in the game when used correctly (thanks to their cheapness) but folk are reading them incorrectly, or rather not understanding what an attack is in the game.

 

What I'm going to do is talk us through it so we can point people to this thread and ensure there are no misunderstandings.

 

Our Sons of Guilliman and Avenge the Fallen Strategums are somewhat confusing if you're used to it the other way or reading the Captains re-roll rules:

 

Sons of Guilliman - "...If that unit has the Troops Battlefield Role, until the end of that phase, when resolving an attack made by that unit, you can re-roll a hit roll. Otherwise, until the end of that phase, when resolving an attack made by that unit, you can re-roll a hit roll of a 1."

 

Avenge the Fallen - "...until the end of the battle, when resolving an attack by an Ultramarines model from your army against that unit, re-roll a hit roll of a 1."

 

Now in reverse order, each throw of the die is considered an attack, with a Heavy Bolter getting 3 attacks. This means Avenge of the Fallen is telling us that each individual attack made by any model can re-roll a hit roll of a 1.

 

That's fine, this is easy. The confusion is coming because people are assuming it would say "the hit rolls" when it has stipulated "a" hit roll. This is fine since it's referring to each attack individually anyway.

 

The former, Sons of Guilliman, was confusing me at first with its different wording, but remaining calm and remembering my breathing techniques steadied my resolve. We select a unit then, when we resolve an attack by the unit, we can re-roll a hit roll. Since Fast rolling is optional this is actually just making it clear that each attack receives a single re-roll.

 

It's just being complete and clear.

 

Consider how useless the re-roll wound be if it was a single unit can re-roll a single hit roll of a 1! Thank goodness this isn't the case.

 

Feel free to explain this to your doubting friends, stubborn tournament opponents and even those lovely YouTube battle report dudes.

 

And if you've not had any doubters try and spoil the high quality Strategums we have then it's even better"

 

:)

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Thanks for the PSA. /Thumbsup

[jonjacob]

i would expect this to go wrong in a causal game for sure.

Speaking of confusion i only now understand the purpose tactical expertise. in that you call the stratagem turn 3; then switch to the assault doctrine shortly there after. Best way to mitigate the cumulative rule in combat doctrines.

[Brother Captain Ed]

They changed the wording relating to attacks all over the books. It's going to cause much disruption until they deign to either issue a blanket explanation or an FAQ.

[Captain Idaho]

Grammatically it works but you're right; it will cause a right stir.

 

Fortunately us Ultramarines players are ahead of the bell curve ;)

[KhorneHunter57x]

Additionally, note the difference between those Stratagems and the wording of the Salamanders' Chapter Tactic - the latter clearly specifies 'a single' hit/wound roll.

 

However, if each throw of the dice is considered a single attack, that does mean that the Martial Precision Stratagem only impacts a single roll...which makes sense, but does feel a little weaker than I initially thought (or would like...and a little weaker compared to some Stratagems out there).

 

Still, it's murky enough for casual readers and rules lawyers that I'd like GW to answer it in an FAQ, just to make it very clear how it's supposed to work.

 

 

Avenge the Fallen

Be cautious, brothers - the Dark Angels might take issue with our use of that Stratagem.

[Captain Idaho]

On reflection Martial Precision HAS to be a single attack. Imagine if you could automatically hit with 12 Assault Cannon shots in the Devastator Doctrine! Or a Punisher Sicarian with 20 shots...

 

Not bad for 1 CP!

[MrZakalwe]

The Sons of Guilliman one looks like the one from the last codex that gave full rerolls to tacs and ints. Not much has changed there (except them all getting an additional point of rend, I guess) so it still looks like a good strat.

 

The wording is terrible though, rules quality seems to be regressing. 

[Captain Idaho]

The important part is folk need to know what an attack is referring to in this game.

 

I'll check when I get home but I believe this is the same for Wisdom of the Ancients.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Thanks Captain.

[Brother Captain Ed]

The Sons of Guilliman one looks like the one from the last codex that gave full rerolls to tacs and ints. Not much has changed there (except them all getting an additional point of rend, I guess) so it still looks like a good strat.

 

The wording is terrible though, rules quality seems to be regressing.

No. The opposite is true. The wording is progressing. Every die roll is a single attack and the system utilizes many rules that reflect that. We as players are lazy and have blurred the line because of the repetitive action of speed rolling.

 

However, there will certainly be confusion as people adjust.