AoS ripperdactyls and re-rolls

[Nefertem]

Unfortunately life's taken too much hobby time recently, so I only got time for a game this evening. We had a tactical discussion on rippers and re-rolls, and I'd like to ask the more rule knowing ones.

Question is: in the rules errata is written that warscrolls beat the rules. My friend is arguing that this would not be true for matched play. Therefore, in matched play you'd still have the rules of 1. I told him that this was what's happening actally, and why then did they play it differently, for example on 6n tourney. I couldn't find the relevant passages on the fly, so I had no proove and further arguments.
Follow up question. Swooping Rippers that hit with their beaks get a new hit roll. Am I allowed to re roll any miss of newly generated hits (as per swooping) or do I have one reroll per attack? That is to say, I have 9 attacks (toad in range), and I have one re roll in each of the possible to hit "chains"?

Thanks...

 

[Aginor]

Interesting questions, I will see what I can dig up, just about this one here first:

Therefore, in matched play you'd still have the rules of 1

The "Rules of One" are gone, they don't exist anymore, so they cannot apply.
So this is definitely false. There are only very few special rules specifically for matched play now (and all of them are in the GHB2018, which is now the only GHB containing valid rules), the former "Rules of One" are now part of the core rules which apply for all game modes.
And as stated by the core rules themself, abilities on warscrolls take precedent over core rules. So any ability that explicitly tells you to do something that is against the core rules (such as the Rippers' "Voracious Appetite" or Kroak's "Celestial Deliverance" spell) wins over the core rules. GW even made a FAQ to clarify that, I thought that would finally be the end of the discussion.

So if anyone (including tournaments) does it differently, then they do it as a house rule. Which is OK if it is known to all players before they build their lists. It is just as valid as a house rule banning Scraplaunchers because they are OP and that's how people should handle it.

 

[Nefertem]

Ok, so additionally hits generated through voracious appetite that missed can be re-rolled due to swooping, until i fail any re-rolled sub-hits, is that correct?

 

[Aginor]

Ok, so additionally hits generated through voracious appetite that missed can be re-rolled due to swooping, until i fail any re-rolled sub-hits, is that correct?

Not 100% sure on that yet but I tend to say yes, because those hits work like all other hits. There is no indication that rerolls shouldn't apply to them.

 

[Nefertem]

Thanks

 

[Flo]

As for the rerolls i was told yes today in my local GW Store, as they are new hit rolls, which you can reroll

Only rerolling a reroll is forbidden in the rules

 

[Klap]

I think you are wrong, in the same section that says about warscrolls overriding the core rules there is this passage:

“Lastly, any extra attacks, hit rolls or wound rolls gained by the use of an ability cannot themselves generate extra attacks, hitrolls, or wound rolls.”

To me just reading the section that says it over rides it and then ignoring the rest of the rules in that section is pointless or why would they have put that passage in the rules

 

[Flo]

It depends on the wording of the warscroll, the command ability of the scar vet on carnosaur for example can only generate one additional attack, the rippers can generate infinite Attacks because its explicit written that they can on the warscroll

 

[Nefertem]

@Klap but there's also the rule, that warscrolls override the general rules. Therefore the hit generation because of voracious appetite will generate additional ones. And, as mentioned above, these new hit rolls can be rerolled. That's at least what I assume after my own interpretation and @Flo's and @Aginor's replies.

 

[Canas]

I think you are wrong, in the same section that says about warscrolls overriding the core rules there is this passage:

“Lastly, any extra attacks, hit rolls or wound rolls gained by the use of an ability cannot themselves generate extra attacks, hitrolls, or wound rolls.”

To me just reading the section that says it over rides it and then ignoring the rest of the rules in that section is pointless or why would they have put that passage in the rules

The point is you have 2 variations of abilities that generate extra attacks.

Abilities like our scar-vet's saurian savagery that just say whenever you roll a 6+ you get an extra attack. But don't state explicitly if there's a limit
And abilities like our rippers that specificly state you can keep going.

The first one is subject to the section in the core rules stating it can't generate extra attacks with the extra attacks.
The second one is not as it explicitly overwrites them.

Hence both sections are used and relevant.

The reason for both to exists is that it's easier to balance by having the base-line be that it can't generate infinite attacks cuz that way you don't have to pay as much attention to every single possible combo on every single possible target. Whereas the individual units that have abilities that overrule the general rules can be playtested thoroughly as the amount of combo's you make with em is fairly limited. In general you'l probably end up seeing that all the rules that overwrite the core-rules will have limited interactions with other units and other buffs.

E.g. Rippers can only effect themselves with this ability so all we need to test is rippers + whatever buffs they can get which seeing as they're skinks is a fairly limited subset of buffs which also means it's fairly unlikely that there is some combo that's easy to abuse (or that they'l miss and then someone shows up at a tournament and tables everyone). However if say our scar-vet's on carno command ability would be able to generate infinite attacks we'd need to test it on every single valid target unit with every single additional buff that it can get. This is a much larger set, and it's much more likely that there's some combo that'd be abusive in there.

 

[Klap]

Thanks for the reply and discussion on this.

But the aregument could be that any ability that generates additional attacks could continually generate additional attacks because they are on the waracroll so they supersede the rules.

So following the example of scar-vet Sauron savagery. Saying whenever you roll a 6+ to hit you generate an additional attack. If you are just saying that you override the rules then these 6+ to hit rolls also would generate more hits if they were also 6+ because that’s what it says on the warscroll.

I do agree on the reroll for the additional attacks it’s just the rule for additional attacks that I question.

 

[Flo]

Thats why it depends on the exact wording, the rippers das continue until there are no more hits, that sentence is the key, it is a bit clearer if you look at the German warscrolls too, if you unterstand German

The english version contains a lot variation possibility where the german ones are a bit simpler

My local Store Manager is from England and he said that sometimes the english rules are written with subtle hints that even a native Speaker May have problems with the grammar

 

[Klap]

But the Saurus scar-vet ability says whenever a 6+ is rolled.

So that being the case then the specific wording on the scar-vet warscroll makes it ignore the rules in the core rules because it on the warscroll. The same as any other ability that generates additional attacks.

 

[Flo]

Yes, whenever a 6+ is rolled you make 1 additional attack. Than the sentence is over

Rippers say continue to roll until you don't Hit anymore there is a small difference

Here on the German warscroll it translates Not to whenever just to "if"

You see both rules in the Core rules are applied, the rippers can generate infinite Attacks because their scroll explicit say "keep rolling" the scar Veteran does Not say this so the Core rules apply and you Stop after 1 attack

Its still strong because if Not Stated otherwise, command abilities stack so if you have 2 command points you can use the ability 2 times and gain 2 Attacks per 6+

Now imagine this with the keep rolling sentence:
You save like 3 or 4 CP (which is easy if you play a Sunclaw for example) and use the ability 4 times in your 40s Blob of Saurus with each 6+ you already gain 4 additional attacks

 

[Canas]

They really should just dump those core-rules and write the abilities down in such a way that they're not ambigious… it'd be a hell of a lot easier.

If only cuz the rule "if the warscroll goes against the core rules warscroll wins" is in itself terribly ambigious. Kroak's spell is fairly clear that it's an exception. Rippers are relativly clear as well, explicitly telling you to continue till you no longer hit. But the scar-vet is far more confusing since it just says "if X happens". Depending on how you read this it could either go against the core rules, and thus gain infinite attacks, or comply by them and only get 1 extra attack per base attack...

Can someone make a list of all attacks generating more attacks, maybe we'l find some better examples that clearly follow the core-rules.

Also, another fun ambigious one. What would happen if you combine a scar-vet's ability with the Old one on carno. The old one gives 2 extra attacks, do those now generate extra attacks on a 6+ or can those not generate extra attacks seeing as they were extra attacks to begin with.

Seriously this whole "extra attacks can't generate extra attacks" creates more confusion than anything else… just write on the damn ability if it can go on forever or not.

 

[Flo]

The oldblood doesn't generate extra Attacks, it changes your Attacks characteristic, therefore yes they can generate extra Attacks themselves

But yes i agree with you, it would be easier to just write it a bit clearer in the warscroll (just checked a few of them, i just used the German ones until now and they are ALOT clearer)

 

[Canas]

The oldblood doesn't generate extra Attacks, it changes your Attacks characteristic, therefore yes they can generate extra Attacks themselves

But yes i agree with you, it would be easier to just write it a bit clearer in the warscroll (just checked a few of them, i just used the German ones until now and they are ALOT clearer)

fine take a megaboss then, his ability literally says "do an extra attack with their melee weapons". I'm sure there's another orruk that can give extra attacks on a 6+ similar to our scar-vet and we're back to the previous question of if the extra attacks generate extra attacks or not using a literal interpretation of the rules

 

[Flo]

There i guess its clear as its an extra attack^^

Best way would be to just speak with your Opponent, if you have different opinions just roll a dice

We should not Forget in all those discussions that the Fun should be on First Place

 

[Canas]

There i guess its clear as its an extra attack^^

Best way would be to just speak with your Opponent, if you have different opinions just roll a dice

We should not Forget in all those discussions that the Fun should be on First Place

it's akward to say the least if that's their genuine intent to how it works imho

 

[Killer Angel]

I think you are wrong, in the same section that says about warscrolls overriding the core rules there is this passage:

“Lastly, any extra attacks, hit rolls or wound rolls gained by the use of an ability cannot themselves generate extra attacks, hitrolls, or wound rolls.”

To me just reading the section that says it over rides it and then ignoring the rest of the rules in that section is pointless or why would they have put that passage in the rules

That is a general rule, and warscroll overrides it.

examples:

The scar Vet on Carno lets a saurus unit generate additional attacks for each 6+
The unit influenced by the scar vet ability is the one that does the Attacks; that unit doesn't have any ability, so they cannot do more than one additional attack for each 6+, tnx to the general rule you've quoted.
But the rippers apply their own ability, and that one trumps the general rule.