Warchanter stacking attacks

[Mayple]

Theorycrafting.

What happens if five (Ironjawz) Warchanters stack their +1 to hit on a single warchanter (+5 to hit) in connection to his "on a hit roll of 6, he generates another attack"

Does he generate new attacks from the new attacks, failing only when rolling ones, or does he only generare them once?

Throwing a blade of judgement on top of that would, if the former is the case, surely be.. Highly destructive, no?

Thanks!

[Mayple]

2 hours ago, King Taloren said:

FAQ as of today states that a 1 is a failure and failures do not proc any ability that trigger what a modified roll could.

Excellent!

[Isotop]

7 hours ago, King Taloren said:

As a quick point out though the ability is only on a 6. Not a 6+ so it it only works on an unmodified 6s so the plus 5 to hit does nothing for this attack. Core rules state treat any rule that says 6 instead of 6+ is to be treated as an unmodified 6

Could you provide a reference? Right now I have no access to the rule book itself, but only the online core rules. The only thing I can remember and verify with a reference is this FAQ-ruling from AOS1.0:

"Q: How do abilities which trigger on ‘a roll of 6’ interact with modifiers? For example, if an ability states that it has an effect on ‘a wound roll of 6’ and the model has a modifier which adds 1 to their wound rolls, would a roll of 6 trigger that ability?

A: Yes. In the Warhammer Age of Sigmar rules, ‘a roll of 6’ is treated as being synonymous with ‘a roll of 6 or more’."

(https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Errata/warhammer_aos_rules_en.pdf, page 4)

 

[BaldoBeardo]

9 minutes ago, Mayple said:

Theorycrafting.

What happens if five (Ironjawz) Warchanters stack their +1 to hit on a single warchanter (+5 to hit) in connection to his "on a hit roll of 6, he generates another attack"

Does he generate new attacks from the new attacks, failing only when rolling ones, or does he only generare them once?

Throwing a blade of judgement on top of that would, if the former is the case, surely be.. Highly destructive, no?

Thanks!

He only generates them once.

Core rules, Warscroll, Abilities.

[Mayple]

5 minutes ago, BaldoBeardo said:

He only generates them once.

Core rules, Warscroll, Abilities.

Are you sure? I know it used to be like that, but then they changed things so that warscrolls took precedence over core rules, which in turn made ripperdactyls generate infinite attacks, which then pushed gw to rewrite how ripperdactyls worked (d3 hits per hit instead of generating additional attacks)

That is the source of my confused curiosity.

[Skreech Verminking]

Well I went looking for any rules stating something different or going into it more precisely.

but there were non, you couldn’t even find any explanation on this kind of problems in the faqs.

and since the 3 in 1rule stopped existing, I guess it might be possible.

[Aelfric]

The Warchanter's ability as worded only grants additional attacks on a role of 6.  There is no other wording on the warscroll that contradicts the core rule that additional attacks do not themselves generate extra attacks.  Therefore the core rule stands.  You can generate a maximum of 4 additional attacks for a total of 8.

The problem with the Ripperdactyls was that it's wording could be seen to countermand the core rules, whereas this does not.

[Mayple]

5 minutes ago, Aelfric said:

The Warchanter's ability as worded only grants additional attacks on a role of 6.  There is no other wording on the warscroll that contradicts the core rule that additional attacks do not themselves generate extra attacks.  Therefore the core rule stands.  You can generate a maximum of 4 additional attacks for a total of 8.

The problem with the Ripperdactyls was that it's wording could be seen to countermand the core rules, whereas this does not.

Wasn't the ripperdactyl wording more or less identical to the warchanter's one though? How did it differ?

[Skreech Verminking]

1 hour ago, BaldoBeardo said:

He only generates them once.

Core rules, Warscroll, Abilities.

Oh cool so a warchanter with +5 to the hit would only generate attacks if you miss.

isnt that somehow funny.

in other words you would have an infinite number of rerolls to hit?

[Aelfric]

1 minute ago, Mayple said:

Wasn't the ripperdactyl wording more or less identical to the warchanter's one though? How did it differ?

It had the addition of "carry on until a hit roll does not score a hit, then make any wound rolls".  This  wording was on a warscroll and warscrolls took precedent over core rules.  The Warchanter warscroll has no such wording.

[Skreech Verminking]

3 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Oh cool so a warchanter with +5 to the hit would only generate attacks if you miss.

isnt that somehow funny.

in other words you would have an infinite number of rerolls to hit?

An guarantee of doing always 4d6mortal wounds against a hero or monster.

well I guess you (Mayple) can officially call yourself the most brutal and cunning (or is it most cunning and brutal) Orruk player in the world.

[Mayple]

13 minutes ago, Aelfric said:

It had the addition of "carry on until a hit roll does not score a hit, then make any wound rolls".  This  wording was on a warscroll and warscrolls took precedent over core rules.  The Warchanter warscroll has no such wording.

Aaaaah. Thank you, that sorts it

11 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

An guarantee of doing always 4d6mortal wounds against a hero or monster.

5/6 chance of 4d6 mortal wounds, yes. A 1 is always a failure. 

(Remember that Packmasters work the same way, minus the extra attacks that generates. Cheaper though, hint hint, nudge nudge.)

15 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

well I guess you (Mayple) can officially call yourself the most brutal and cunning (or is it most cunning and brutal) Orruk player in the world.

Allegedly

[King Taloren]

As a quick point out though the ability is only on a 6. Not a 6+ so it it only works on an unmodified 6s so the plus 5 to hit does nothing for this attack. Core rules state treat any rule that says 6 instead of 6+ is to be treated as an unmodified 6

[BaldoBeardo]

5 hours ago, King Taloren said:

As a quick point out though the ability is only on a 6. Not a 6+ so it it only works on an unmodified 6s so the plus 5 to hit does nothing for this attack. Core rules state treat any rule that says 6 instead of 6+ is to be treated as an unmodified 6

Can I ask you where this is? The rules stipulate "unmodified" will be stated where relevant but that's not the case here.

I can't find anything saying Abilities only work on the target number either.

Only asking because I've looked and can't find it, so want to know what I've missed!

[Mayple]

I'm having the same difficulties @BaldoBeardo

I do remember a mention saying that "on a roll of 6" equals "6+/6 or more", but that could have been the old edition. Either way, natural rolls tends to be specified as "on an unmodified roll of..", since modifiers normally affect the result, trumped only by re-rolls before modifiers. 

That being said, if anyone has a source saying something else, then by all means

[Isotop]

1 hour ago, BaldoBeardo said:

I dont see any ambiguity - in the absence of any other evidence or precedent, it's got to be (1) - "the attack sequence ends, but not until after I've added a modifier to this dice roll to trigger a special ability to end the attack sequence" just doesn't seem to have anything to back it up.

Anecdotal; There are plenty of MW abilities that trigger on the hit roll and auto-fail 1's have been around for a while, so I struggle to believe that this is a newly discovered situation.

 

I think it is a bit biased to state there is no backup for (2) while saying "it´s got to be (1)" without any backup for it either.  Just to be clear, I do not want to offend you in any way - it is just hard for me to follow the argument you presented.

In fact, I think there is someting indicating (2) could be true in deed - and it is found in the wording of Sword of Judgement itself:

"[...] and the attack sequence ends (do not make a wound or save roll)." (from Google pictures - have no better source at hand)

It appears to me that the part in the brackets is the definition or at least explanation for "end of attack sequence". It does not state that you stop the whole procedure immediately, but instructs you to not proceed with the steps after the hit roll phase. It sounds pretty much like (2) to me.

[Isotop]

17 hours ago, Mayple said:

5/6 chance of 4d6 mortal wounds, yes. A 1 is always a failure. 

I am not sure if that is true. Sword of Judgement says if a hit roll is 6+, that attack inflicts D6 mortal wounds and the attack sequence ends (emphasis mine - searched for the rules in Google pictures). A hit roll of 1 (before modifications) is a miss, which means you are not allowed to proceed to the next step in the attack sequence (wound roll). I fail to find a good argument for a 1 on a hit roll from a model with Sword of Judgement and +5 to hit not to cause the D6 mortals.

[Mayple]

22 minutes ago, Isotop said:

I am not sure if that is true. Sword of Judgement says if a hit roll is 6+, that attack inflicts D6 mortal wounds and the attack sequence ends (emphasis mine - searched for the rules in Google pictures). A hit roll of 1 (before modifications) is a miss, which means you are not allowed to proceed to the next step in the attack sequence (wound roll). I fail to find a good argument for a 1 on a hit roll from a model with Sword of Judgement and +5 to hit not to cause the D6 mortals.

I see what you're getting at.

I would personally play it as the natural 1 is a failure to inflict the d6 mortal wounds because that feels -fair-, chance of failure and all that. At least when I'm the one swinging the sword

That being said, I'm curious if it works the way you describe. Definitely worth looking into.

[Skreech Verminking]

Technical issue

[BaldoBeardo]

2 hours ago, Mayple said:

I see what you're getting at.

I would personally play it as the natural 1 is a failure to inflict the d6 mortal wounds because that feels -fair-, chance of failure and all that. At least when I'm the one swinging the sword

That being said, I'm curious if it works the way you describe. Definitely worth looking into.

Attack sequence ends on an unmodified roll of 1, i.e. before you add modifiers.

So you never get to add the +5 to the hit roll to trigger the 6+.

[Skreech Verminking]

13 minutes ago, BaldoBeardo said:

Attack sequence ends on an unmodified roll of 1, i.e. before you add modifiers.

So you never get to add the +5 to the hit roll to trigger the 6+.

Ok cool so it is only plus 4 to the to hit role needed to do d6mortal wounds on a 2up?

[Isotop]

12 minutes ago, BaldoBeardo said:

Attack sequence ends on an unmodified roll of 1, i.e. before you add modifiers.

So you never get to add the +5 to the hit roll to trigger the 6+.

Well thats a valid interpretation what "miss" means. Unfortunately we are dealing with GW rules, so I am not 100% convinced.

[Isotop]

2 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Ok cool so it is only plus 4 to the to hit role needed to do d6mortal wounds on a 2up?

We are still not sure on this whole thing since @King Taloren might come up with the rules part we might have missed.

[BaldoBeardo]

23 minutes ago, Isotop said:

Well thats a valid interpretation what "miss" means. Unfortunately we are dealing with GW rules, so I am not 100% convinced.

It's actually quite clear in the core rules.

If you fail to hit, attack sequence ends.

An unmodified roll of 1 always fails.

Rules on page 1 state "unmodified" means before modifiers, not without modifiers. There is a sequence.

So the check on autofail occurs before modifiers.

If you fail, the attack sequence ends.

If the attack sequence has ended, you don't work out your modified hit roll.

So you don't score the 6+.

[Isotop]

The only uncertainty I am seeing lies in the term "end of attack sequence". In my view it can either mean:

(1) Full stop - abort the whole process immediately

or

(2) Do not proceed to the next step (wound roll)

If (2) was the case, there would be no reason to not add hit modifiers to the roll before ending the attack.

[Skreech Verminking]

Ok, i went everywhere looking for an explanation of our problem her.

and I found this:

 

now, well with a +4-5 to the to hit role you won’t do an infinite number of attacks.

you still have the possibility to do 8d6mortal wounds with ease. 

As for any rules or clarification stating that the Warchanter ability is beeing used as it would be umodified, I didn’t find.

and I went looking for it on every faq rule etc.

so if I missed something please tell me and if possible with some kind of evidence.

i hate to use rules with which I am not certain of it beeing a thing.