Rerolling 1s and +to hit

[Furious]

Hey guys, I've got a rolling question - 

If I'm running an Orruk Warboss with the Bellowing Tyrant trait (+1 to hit rolls), and I use it on Orruks with two hand weapons (reroll hit rolls of 1), do I miss out on the reroll? If so, is it statistically better to not use the command trait?

 

Thanks

[BaldoBeardo]

1st page of the main rules. Rerolls happen before modifiers are applied.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Furious]

Oh awesome, thanks. I forgot about that one.

So, that first roll I would not consider a roll of 3 a success, because the modifier isn't applied yet?

And, similar question - if my warboss gets to reroll save rolls with a +4, and is being attacked by a -1 rend, does he need to roll a 4+ to save, and then a 5+ if he fails that?

[Squirrelmaster]

Hmm…

I guess, strictly speaking, a 4+ re-rollable save vs rend -1 would mean you first roll a dice, on a 5+ he's fine, on a 4 he fails, on a 3 or less he re-rolls, then on the re-roll a 5+ is fine and 4 or less fails.

I've never seen anyone play that way (generally people would just play it as a 5+ re-rollable, not a 5+ re-rolling 3s and below), but that is what the rules say.

[Squirrelmaster]

It gets weirder if you go the other way — instead of rend -1, imagine if he had mystic shield — you could roll a 3 for your save (which would pass, normally), and be forced to re-roll it because, before modifiers, it "failed".

[rokapoke]

1 hour ago, Squirrelmaster said:

It gets weirder if you go the other way — instead of rend -1, imagine if he had mystic shield — you could roll a 3 for your save (which would pass, normally), and be forced to re-roll it because, before modifiers, it "failed".

I can't speak for too many of the "reroll save" abilities, but the Knight-Questor says "You can reroll failed save rolls for this model" (emphasis added). So for his ability, at least, you wouldn't be forced to reroll the 2 because of the Mystic Shield. I don't know if other wording works the same, but that at least fixes that end of the problem. 

As for rending attacks, my opponents and I have consistently ruled on the side of failing after the rend modification means you reroll the save. It's much more intuitive than the rules-as-written method, which creates a grey area where failed saves don't get rerolled.

[Nico]

Quote

As for rending attacks, my opponents and I have consistently ruled on the side of failing after the rend modification means you reroll the save. It's much more intuitive than the rules-as-written method, which creates a grey area where failed saves don't get rerolled.

I agree with this. The rerolls before modifiers rule is intended to cover things like 1s (so not rerolling the 2s with the 1s being zeroes with -1 rend - which is really awkward) for simplicity. The reroll all failed saves or all hits must be post modifiers. This seems like something that goes without saying.

[BaldoBeardo]

As for rending attacks, my opponents and I have consistently ruled on the side of failing after the rend modification means you reroll the save. It's much more intuitive than the rules-as-written method, which creates a grey area where failed saves don't get rerolled.

I agree with this. The rerolls before modifiers rule is intended to cover things like 1s (so not rerolling the 2s with the 1s being zeroes with -1 rend - which is really awkward) for simplicity. The reroll all failed saves or all hits must be post modifiers. This seems like something that goes without saying.

It doesn't break the order, either - you can't know if a save has failed until you apply the modifier, so this is a different stage in the sequence.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Nico]

Quote

It doesn't break the order, either - you can't know if a save has failed until you apply the modifier, so this is a different stage in the sequence.

Good point, well made.

[Furious]

What a confusing rule. But that's pretty much how I've played it - modifiers don't affect the re-rolling of 1s rules.

Thanks everyone.

[Squirrelmaster]

I think we're all agreed how it should be interpreted, but it'd be nice if GW confirmed with an FAQ at some point.

You definitely can know if a roll is failing or succeeding before applying modifiers — if I need a 4+ and have a +1 bonus, a "3" is a failure before modifiers, a success after. And if you have to wait until the "final outcome" is determined, you can't know if a save is passed or failed until after re-rolls have been applied, so… you have to wait until after you've made your re-rolls, before you can make your re-rolls?

I just hope no-one tries to argue this against me in a game, because as it stands I don't really feel like I have a valid counter-argument except "no-one plays that way".

[rokapoke]

33 minutes ago, Squirrelmaster said:

I think we're all agreed how it should be interpreted, but it'd be nice if GW confirmed with an FAQ at some point.

You definitely can know if a roll is failing or succeeding before applying modifiers — if I need a 4+ and have a +1 bonus, a "3" is a failure before modifiers, a success after. And if you have to wait until the "final outcome" is determined, you can't know if a save is passed or failed until after re-rolls have been applied, so… you have to wait until after you've made your re-rolls, before you can make your re-rolls?

I just hope no-one tries to argue this against me in a game, because as it stands I don't really feel like I have a valid counter-argument except "no-one plays that way".

In my eyes, your middle paragraph is your counter-argument. You can't determine whether the save is successful or not without the modifiers. Tell your opponent that you'll reroll any saves that didn't succeed -- it's clearly the intention of the rerolling ability.