T10

@XReN: The quoted text says nothing about re-rolling. Could you explain how you came to your conclusion? -T10

@King Taloren: The only thing bunk here is the Designers commentary on re-rolls and modifiers. With regards to post-modifier conditions for re-rolls (success/fail) they introduced a solution no-one needed and it proves to have consequences beyond hit and wound rolls. For this particular ability, it is still "bunk" in any "can't fail" scenario, regardless of re-rolls pre- or post-modifiers.

So the Battleshock rules' "add the number of models from the unit that have been slain this turn" might not count as a "modifier", but a Bloodwrack Medusa's Terrifying Beauty's "subtract 1 from hit rolls" does?

The game already has models with abilities and rules that can render HUGE hordes immune to battleshock tests. Buying in on the same ability at a cost does not seem unreasonable. Kill the Heroes, negate IP. -T10

No, the actual battleshock roll is the roll of the dice. Then you add the number of slain models to the roll. This results in a modified battleshock roll. The rules do describe benefits of having large units: This adds to the Bravery characteristic, resulting in a modified Bravery characteristic. Or perhaps you feel that "re-rolls before modifiers" is a more fluid rule when it comes to other things than hits, wounds and save rolls? -T10

I am sure that is true under the condition that the player considers himself able to construct and play an army that has the potential to perform satisfactory in this mission. The OP, considering his track record with it, would in fact be better served investing as little effort as possible in handling the scenario and instead focus on improving his odds on other scenarios where he can play to his army's strength. In other words: MORE reserves! Astute readers may notice that this would be the opposite effect than one would assume is the intention of the designers of the scenario. -T10

It probably hurts Bravery 6+ units a bit, but not in the way you describe. If only the Spire Revenant's Ability is in play, then the first roll is irrelevant. That 6 or 1 you end up with may both have been preceded by a 1 or a 6: it doesn't matter when only the last roll is applied. The result is for the unit is the same wether it is affected by the ability or not. However, being forced to re-roll the first dice roll removes the players option to keep the first roll (obviously!) which matters a great deal if he has the ability to re-roll battleshock tests for other reasons - you can't re-roll the dice more than once. The unit's own ability to re-roll is effectively lost, in the proper sense of the word: They still re-roll, but it's not to their benefit. I guess this broadens the scope of units for which this ability can actually have a appreciable effect. -T10

So they are at least not entirely useless, even against Bravery 5 that's a second roll to hope for a 6. I understand battleshock tests just fine. It's the re-roll failed tests that turn out to be the problem since apparently re-rolls happen before modifiers. -T10

The "competitive" play of AoS needs features that empower the player going second in the battle round. Winning the priority roll should allow the player to carefully consider going first or second, it shouldn't be an automatic, no-brainer choice to go first. If about one in three rounds in a game gave a significant benefit to the second player I think the priority roll mechanic becomes very interesting and not simply an unpredictable aspect of the game,

Their ability to cause successful battleshock tests to be re-rolled is a pretty pointless against most units that have Bravery 6+ since it's impossible to fail so you'll just be rolling the dice twice anyway, picking the second result. How common are Bravery 1-5 units in your experience? -T10

@Kramer When an Ability states "Re-roll failed hit rolls", I want to re-roll failed hit rolls. I don't want a big lecture on how this 4 is not eligible for a re-roll because of yada-yada-yada. If it's a failed hit roll, I re-roll it. Otherwise it's a hit. -T10

"So you are saying that the DESIGNERS are wrong about THEIR OWN RULES?" Well, yeah. The part where success and failure is dependent on the unmodified roll? There is nothing in the core rules that even suggests such a thing. The Designers Commentary author here seems oblivious to the fact that Abilities can also override core rules, not just expand upon them, and so believes the core rules must be preserved and invents this "unmodified success/failure" thing to make the pieces kinda fit.

I think players are overly enamoured by the "cleverness" of "looking ahead" at the pre-modified result of a roll. It takes a certain level of rules awareness to notice that the the re-rolling before modifiers (of which follows: before establishing success/fail results) does not mesh with abilities that allow re-roll it success/fail results! Edit: This is really an unnecessarily complex way to shoehorn in the core rules into an Ability. Complex in that it is not immediately intuitive or described in the rules, and unnecessary because the Ability supersedes this core rule anyway. There is certainly nothing in the core rules that suggests you follow this sort of "look ahead" procedure. Meanwhile, there is a clear statement in the rules that Abilities take precedence over the core rule. The closest thing we have to a core rule that cannot be overridden by an Ability is the rule that a dice can never be re-rolled more than once. And even *that* rule is frequently broken e.g. for the purpose of generating unique results from a table. By comparison, the rules for re-rolls and modifiers simply state how they work, and do not even include the use of "always like this" or "never in any other way". This rule is no more exempt from exception than is the requirement for line of sight when shooting or being within 3" of an enemy unit to be able to fight. -T10

A Crimson Murderman, as we know, attacks 6 times with his pair of cutting swords, hitting on a 4+. He has an ability that reads: So we make our rolls to hit: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Under normal circumstances he re-rolls the 1, 2 and 3. If he is subject to a -1 penalty to his hit rolls, his series of rolls is modified to 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. One would assume that his ability would allow him to re-roll the result of 0, 1, 2 and 3, but here there seems to be some controversy: "You can't re-roll that dice that reads 4, because before modifiers that counts as a hit since you need a 4+ to hit, and you can only re-roll failed hit rolls! And after modifiers it counts as 3, which is a failed hit roll. Since re-rolls happen before modifiers the opportunity to re-roll has passed, so you can't re-roll." Why is it acceptable to "look ahead" at the required to To Hit score to decide if it's a hit or fail, but skip taking into account the modifiers that are going to determine if it's a hit or a fail? This seems a bit weird. It shouldn't even be necessary since this is done to achieve the procedural point of adhering to the re-rolls-then-modifiers sequence in the core rules, which is the only opportunity when re-rolls are available. However, according to the Warscrolls rules for Abilities... Why is it so important to preserve the core rule that "re-rolls happen before modifiers to the roll (if any) are applied", but we are happy to let an ability break the restriction that you cannot run and charge in the same turn? I submit that the proper application of this ability is as follows: Roll to hit. The Crimson Murderman rolls a 4. Apply re-rolls. At this point, the Crimson Murderman is not entitled to any re-rolls since his rolls have not been compared to his To Hit characteristic and are not yet determined as hits or failed. Apply modifiers. The hit roll is modified by -1 to 3. Compare hit roll to To Hit characteristic. It is a failure. Apply the Crimson Murderman's ability to re-roll failed hit rolls. He rolls the dice again. Since this is still a roll to hit, the modifiers are applied to the new roll. The re-roll results in a 4, modified by -1 to 3, and is compared to the To Hit characteristic and determined to be a fail. Note that the dice is still only re-rolled once. -T10

Well, I am going to make sure my group of players are aware of the official stance on this. I still think it has compounded into an overall poor way of resolving first/last strike effects and I will suggest that as a house rule, these are resolved on a case-by-case basis: When it is your turn to pick a unit to fight, you either have any currently eligible units unit, or you pass to your opponent who does the same. During this exchange units may cease to be eligible (often they are dead, or casualties and pile in moves have left them out of combat range), or the may become eligible (enemies have moved into combat range, or conditions have caused them to have to wait). While I am sure the community at large will adhere to the Designers Commentary, I think sticking with players alternating and picking units based on what is eligible to fight at this point is moderately more complex but very much in keeping with the core rules.

I do not have the Azyr app I am afraid, I only have the core rules. Is the rules text different? While the rules commentary on climbing specifically addresses vertical movement, I think it is fair to assume that the underlying intention of the designers here is that although a model cannot always be physically left in place in the position it can legally reach this should not be a hindrance to it in gameplay. Also, in the same way that a WHCom article is not really the same as "being FAQ'ed", the Designers' Commentary isn't really "the new rules". That would be what's in the actual rules.

What the-? With all respect to the designers, that sounds like ox ******. Under normal circumstances, when a pile in move brings additional units in to "fight range", these units are added to the "pool" of units able to fight. For example, Bob charges his Prosecutors in to within 3" of several of Jim's units. The units fight as follows: Bob's Prosecutors Jim's Daemonettes Jim's Seekers Jim's Fiends (these pile in to within 3" of Bob's Liberators) Bob's Liberators How does it make any sense that, if for some reason, Jim's Fiends had been slowed to fight last then Bob's Liberator's would be unable to fight? Really, this idea of a pre-fight and post-fight combat phase for first- and last-striking units has got to be something they came up with to solve a simpler issue, and they now feel they need to stick with.

I was trying to find the wobbly model rules for AoS, but it seems the core rules do not cover that. I guess that this is just something I picked up from 40k and assumed was a part of AoS as well, considering the similarities between their rule sets. That thing about marking the assumed position of a model does not appear to be a part of the core rules, at least not in the movement or terrain sections. Where is this?

I don't think a WHCom article really qualifies as "it has been FAQ'ed".

If you are thinking of this: The part where the current player gets to fight with ALL first-strike units before his opponent fights with ALL first-strike units sounds like something they pulled out of their donkey. There is certainly no precedent in the rules, except for the opposite, i.e. alternating. Then again, this is Designers Commentary, so I guess it's what they meant to include in the rules, but didn't. We can only hope that the next edition of the core rules will address specifically the fairly common issue of abilities that modify the order in which units fight.

Well, this was more a question of opposing units being able to fight, but your input has been noted.

Hi! I notice that most models are unable to balance in the stairs of the Sigmarite Dais. I seem to recall a clarification on the wobbly model rule is intended only to keep models safe from being knocked over, and is not intended as a convenience to allow models to count as standing where they cannot actually stand! Note: The stairs are also more than 2" long, meaning that a model on the edge of the platform and a model directly below him and in base contact with the bottom stairs is within 3", but outside of 2". The stairs are clearly traversable and do not block line of sight, it's just impossible to actually stand on them with a model... Now, assuming that wobbly model rules don't allow you to put models on the stairs, you can potentially fill the dais with models close enough to the edge to deny enemy models standing on it and only be be able to exchange ranged attacks (pretty common) and melee attacks with 3" range (not very common). What do you think of this? Is it fine to have a piece of terrain where a unit can assume a powerful defensive position? Or do you house rule it in such a way that regular 1" reach units can at least attempt to fight? -T10

Are you sure there isn't more to it than that? Players take turns in selecting units to fight, so each time your opponent completes combat with one of his units, you check to see if you have any eligible units that can be selected to fight. Sometimes you don't have any units to select, but then later in the same phase you have a unit that has become eligible, e.g. due to enemies piling in close enough to draw a unit into combat, or in the OPs case "all other units have fought" or whatever. if the two Keepers are the only units that are eligible to fight at the start of the combat phase and they both have to wait, then the first player, Jim, runs through his list of 1 unit and checks if it is eligible to be selected to fight. This unit has a restriction that says he must wait until last to fight. So Jim checks if he has any other units that can fight now instead and has none. He and his opponent, Bob, checks if Bob has any units that can fight. Bob only has one unit but that too must wait until last. Jim therefore gets to pick his Keeper to be the u it to fight first. Bob then goes through the same process. At this point Jim could have piled in closer and drawn into combat a unit of Bob's Daemonettes who (I assume!) would have to be selected to fight before Bob's Keeper. However, "striking last" isn't a separate combat phase started by the player whose turn it is. In Jim's turn, the two Keepers might cause each other to both strike last, and the sequence of units fighting could be something like this: Jim's Daemonettes Bob's Daemonettes Jim's Seekers Jim's Fiends Bob's Keeper Jim's Keeper -T10