8th Ed. Rule issues and bias

[airjamy]

Not really sure that this belongs in the Tactics section, but I feel like that this is the best place to state this. I was playing a game against a Dwarf player the other day, and I got into an argument about him rerolling the artillery dice twice because he disliked the result. I feel like it is clearly stated in the rules that you can never, ever, reroll a dice more then once, but his argument was that Armybook>BRB, so he could in this instance. He also notified me on the fact that the entire Dwarf forum was agreeing with him on this.

I do not really intend this thread to be a discussion on whether this guy was wrong or right in this case, but I would like to dedicate it to the idea that in every Warhammer forum that specializes in one army, like ours, is always inherently biased to their own army. The people on these forums often are by far the most knowledgeable on their specific chosen army, but that does not mean that the group is always right, it is pretty likely that the people in this group actually, probably without even really knowing or noticing it, are very likely to support interpretations of the rules that ‘’help’’ their own army. What are your thoughts on this, and don’t we have this problem at least a bit, with something like the whole PF debacle?

 

[n810]

Sounds like beardy Shenanigans on his part.

 

[Bainbow]

Thing is, pretty much every army has some way to break the rules. For example, our general can also be the BSB even though that's normally illegal, and Skaven can shoot into combat. I'd check the Dwarfs book to see if he's right, but if it says he can then he should be allowed to.

 

[FRYtheEGGofQUANGO]

So the BRB implicitly states that you can never re-roll a re-roll, then states that AB>BRB, then puts in the AB that you can re-roll the re-roll... This is poor rules planning on GW's behalf. Looks like you can't argue with how the rules are written; I think he get's the re-roll. It was definitely not intended to be that way though! This kind of thing is why I dislike the AB > BRB... it'd be a better system if the rules were never contradictory, but that is probably very hard/impossible to achieve.

What are your thoughts on this, and don’t we have this problem at least a bit, with something like the whole PF debacle?

Yeah, this is exactly what I thought when players on LustriaOnline discuss PF rules/ posted their opinions on the poll. I think it would still have the same overall answer if impartial people were asked instead, but i'm sure lots of the votes from the LustriaOnline poll will have come from bias. You can't change people.

 

[Scalenex]

It is possible to roll a grudge thrower and re-roll both the scatter die and the artillery die if he bought the Rune of Forging and the Rune of Accuracy, but as far as I can tell from reading this, you can't roll either of the individual dice twice with runes alone.

With a literal reading of the rules (and I favor literal reading of the rules), you can re-roll either artillery die again If and only if you have a Master Engineer or Grim Burloksson (the Master Engineer SC). At least that's the call I would make.

The main point of your argument stands, there is bias towards one's army. I'm not sure it's huge bias. The WHF community at large seems split 50/50 on whether supporting PF attacks count. The Lizardmen forum poll on this was not even 67/33 in our favor if I memory serves me.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

The main point of your argument stands, there is bias towards one's army. I'm not sure it's huge bias. The WHF community at large seems split 50/50 on whether supporting PF attacks count. The Lizardmen forum poll on this was not even 67/33 in our favor if I memory serves me.

Yes, but I must admit that the Lizardmen forum poll seems especially well constructed. Kudos to the OP.

Back on topic, there is no real way to eliminate bias. We'll have bias towards our army, but if others are asked they are more likely to oppose a rule that benefits us because they have bias towards their army. That's why only a FAQ can ever really solve the problem.

 

[Bainbow]

Ironically I often tend to be biased against my army for fear that I may accidentally be biased and unintentionally cheat. Funny.

 

[airjamy]

Yes, but I must admit that the Lizardmen forum poll seems especially well constructed. Kudos to the OP.

Back on topic, there is no real way to eliminate bias. We'll have bias towards our army, but if others are asked they are more likely to oppose a rule that benefits us because they have bias towards their army. That's why only a FAQ can ever really solve the problem.

This might be the main message, and the best way to combat bias is to be aware of it. I am currently dealing with BS on a academic base, and it is interesting how groups get these sorts of biases. Think we'll be allright though.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

At the end of the day it all boils down to this...

• everyone has bias, and that is okay
• discuss rules discrepancies prior to starting a game
• remember that it is only a game!
• if you still can't agree, don't play each other

 

[Pinktaco]

Uh.. I'm having a hard time seeing how that is possible, but then again I'm not too familiar with the Dwarf rule book. Anyway I looked it up and here's what I can find:

Master Engineer: Allow for rerolling one artillery dice.
Grimm Burloksson: Allow for rerolling one artillery dice.

Rune of Forging: Allow for rerolling one artillery dice HOWEVER you must accept the second roll. Also only when you misfire.
Rune of Accuracy: Allow for rerolling one artillery dice HOWEVER you must accept the second roll.

So it's clear here that the issue lie with the characters because they don't have the same phrase as the runes (that you must accept the second roll).

The way I see it is that this is just an alterantive way of spreading out your rerolls.

You *could* argue that herp derp the master engineer doesn't explicetly state that you must accept the second roll, but I don't see anywhere that you can actually reroll a reroll. There don't appear to be a specific rule stating this. This is merely the dwarf player choosing what is best for him.

If your friend play the game like this you better use PF to your own advantage then

Someone more familiar with the book should obviously correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Pinktaco]

At the end of the day it all boils down to this...

• everyone has bias, and that is okay
• discuss rules discrepancies prior to starting a game
• remember that it is only a game!
• if you still can't agree, don't play each other

Or let the roll of a dice determine it. This can be good to overcome stupid situations like these, especially since it isn't game breaking anyway.

 

[Bainbow]

Or let the roll of a dice determine it. This can be good to overcome stupid situations like these, especially since it isn't game breaking anyway.

That's exactly how the people at my GW solve issues, keeps things totally fair and avoids arguments.

 

[airjamy]

If your friend play the game like this you better use PF to your own advantage then

Someone more familiar with the book should obviously correct me if I'm wrong.

The worst thing about PF that the extra attacks are not statistically relevant,, so using that against people you dislike to get an advantage does not even work. XD

 

[Pinktaco]

a unit of spear saurus warrior 7 wide, would be around 5 additional attacks from PF if you cant the 2 supporting rank. 5 additional attacks are what some units can put out from their front rank. I wouldn't consider that completely irrelevant

Obviously PF is best with magic support that grants +1 To Hit, increasing/reducing weapon skill..

Anyway this is getting off topic haha.

There's no doubt in my mind that you cannot reroll a reroll regardless of what the Dwarf books say UNLESS it outright states that you can reroll a reroll (in which case I haven't seen that yet).

 

[VampTeddy]

Well isn't the Empire book in possesion of something similiar (rules-wise) albeit different game-wise in the Rocket launcher?

As far as i have been told, that thing rerols all misfires, after the first firing. And while i feel it makes sense, and is also supported by the rules in that book, and not at all aims towards the same lvl of abuse as the cannons, because it can still misfire, and it fires 3 (i believe it's 3 volleys) per shot, making it otherwise very prone to misfires.

If i had a look in a dwarf book, i'd be trying to notice how it is written.

I believe the same argument as PF is viable here.

Does the Dwarf book state that you are allowed more rerols than normally? If not, there's no conflict. If you're allowed to reroll, you're allowed to reroll per the BRB, period. If it specifically states you're allowed to reroll indefinetely, you're allowed to reroll indefinetely.

Ask him how he feels about PF, if he says no, then he's either unknowingly or knowingly making the rules form to his advantage.

Another important query though should be, are you for or against PF, 'cause if you are for, a "loose" interpretation of the rules should be used for his book too, and in that case, it wouldn't need to state whether or not you can cross a cap, because it doesn't state in our either.

Just my 2 cents.

P.S. That is NOT and invitation to Discuss PF, just an objective (or attempted objective anyways) presentation of 2 views.

 

[Pinktaco]

Well isn't the Empire book in possesion of something similiar (rules-wise) albeit different game-wise in the Rocket launcher?

As far as i have been told, that thing rerols all misfires, after the first firing. And while i feel it makes sense, and is also supported by the rules in that book, and not at all aims towards the same lvl of abuse as the cannons, because it can still misfire, and it fires 3 (i believe it's 3 volleys) per shot, making it otherwise very prone to misfires.

If i had a look in a dwarf book, i'd be trying to notice how it is written.

I believe the same argument as PF is viable here.

Does the Dwarf book state that you are allowed more rerols than normally? If not, there's no conflict. If you're allowed to reroll, you're allowed to reroll per the BRB, period. If it specifically states you're allowed to reroll indefinetely, you're allowed to reroll indefinetely.

Ask him how he feels about PF, if he says no, then he's either unknowingly or knowingly making the rules form to his advantage.

Another important query though should be, are you for or against PF, 'cause if you are for, a "loose" interpretation of the rules should be used for his book too, and in that case, it wouldn't need to state whether or not you can cross a cap, because it doesn't state in our either.

Just my 2 cents.

P.S. That is NOT and invitation to Discuss PF, just an obective (or attempted obejtice anyways) presentation of 2 views.

Having skimmed through the Dwarf AB I couldn't find any text stating this.

 

[GreenMachine]

I've never, ever heard of anyone re-rolling a re-roll in any circumstance or any of the tournaments I've attended. He might have the ability to re-roll the artillery dice (rune of forging and an engineer for example) but neither of those explicitily says that you may re-roll a re-roll. I would recommend not playing this person again as it's terrible RAW usage.

 

[themuffinman873]

I imagine he overstated that the "Entire Dwarf Army Agrees". I actively look for the bias in this forum to make the LM fight a little dirtier (after all I can tell my opponent "that's what LO said!"). However, I have never really found much, I have only learned things that make the LM play less effectively than my usual opponent and I had previously understood (such as PF, and targeting with deliverance).
Regardless, that is an interesting point you bring up OP. Are Dwarves his only army?

 

[Qupakoco]

@spawning of Bob knows the truth.

 

[airjamy]

I've never, ever heard of anyone re-rolling a re-roll in any circumstance or any of the tournaments I've attended. He might have the ability to re-roll the artillery dice (rune of forging and an engineer for example) but neither of those explicitily says that you may re-roll a re-roll. I would recommend not playing this person again as it's terrible RAW usage.

He is reasonable, but he also plays in tournaments, and you cannot begrudge someone for trying to get that extra mileage out of their army. I do feel like it is a bit of a different conflict then the PF conflict, as i feel that the never reroll a reroll is something of a ''core'' rule in warhammer, a bit likt the most important rule. It is somewhat of a safeguard in the rules, just like the cap on certain statistics to make sure that some model can never get indefinite rerolls on something or something like 20 attacks. This is however never stated anywhere in the book as a ''core'' rule, i certainly just made that up, but i feel like the no reroll rerolls rule is intended as something to safeguard against crazy combo's.