Topic: Orks 'Ere we Go and Re-Rolls

[Roboknee77]

So, one of the questions that came up in the first 8th edition battle Wyddr and I played was in regards to the re-roll allowed by the 'Ere We Go rule.  In the game I made a charge roll, needing a 10, and rolled a 6 and a 2.  I thought it allowed me to re-roll one or both of the dice of a failed charge roll and Wyddr thought it meant I had to re-roll both dice.  To keep things moving I spent a command point to re-roll one die and made the charge.

In reading the core rules after the battle, the re-roll blurb says that re-rolls mean you get to roll some or all of the dice again.  By taking the wording of the core rule and adding it into "Ere We Go" it seems to me that it allows you to re-roll one or both of the dice in a failed charge roll instead of rolling both dice again.

I'm asking for thoughts and input since my only army is Da Orks and this is a pretty important rule.  I've looked online and haven't seen any official errata for this.  I have seen other sites say the rule allows for re-rolling one or both dice.  Thoughts?

[Blazinghand]

I also encountered this issue. I believe the "or" in that BRB rule isn't saying you can reroll one die OR two dice, whichever you prefer, but rather, "this applies to both dice when you're rolling 2d6" which means that with 'Ere We Go you will have to reroll both unless you spend a command Point.

[dog_of_war]

I agree that you would need to reroll both dice. In the eighth edition codex it states you can reroll failed charge rolls. Both dice are considered to be the roll. In the seventh edition codex it states you can reroll a dice when determining charge range. Two very distinct methods. Having it allow you to reroll one or both dice would greatly increase the power of that rule from seventh to eighth. I think it is rules as written (raw) and rules as intended (rai) for that one.

[Blazinghand]

The specific issue is the BRB rule which defines what it means to "re-roll" a dice.

[dog_of_war]

I can see where the confusion comes from now. Another great example of a poorly written, ambiguous GW rule. If we were to take rules as written, the core rules are saying that you may reroll any number of dice in a roll when a codex/index rule allows for a reroll. So by this core definition, you may roll one or both dice due to ere we go. Is this rules as intended as well? Hard to say. This now makes ere we go a much more powerful army wide rule than it was in seventh, if you are allowed to roll one or both die. Orks however did need a boost in strength. Until the codec comes out or another faq, I would stick with rules as written and side with roboknee here and say it allows one or both.

Again, we beg the question, if you're going to brag so much about having eighth edition playtested by some of the most experienced gamers out there, why do you present us with such poor, ambiguous rules?

[Saim-Dann]

G'day DoW!
To answer you question. So there are no arguments from the gaming community for the next cash grab... I meant rules change.

[Lord of Winter and War]

The rules for re-rolls, says you can re-roll some or all of the dice.  Looks like that'd be the case in this situation as well. I'd rule it that way. So, if you did roll a 6 and a 2, you could re-roll just the 2.

[Wyddr]

See, I interpret the "some or all of the dice" thing under re-rolls to be simply a generalization. In other words "[depending on the rule in question] you may re-roll some or all of the dice."

For instance, you might only be re-rolling 1s or you might have only one out of three dice to re-roll or you might have all the dice to re-roll, depending.

Ere We Go stipulates you may re-roll failed charges. A charge is 2d6". If you fail it, you would re-roll "the charge," which is still 2d6". You can't necessarily designate which of the dice is responsible for the failure all the time and the rule in no way references dice at all.

Hence my belief you have to re-roll the whole thing.

[Roboknee77]

I can see where you're coming from.  If there was a faq or errata clarifying it I would go with it.  Like how you pointed out disembarking is within, not wholly within.

See, it's an interpretation of a rule without specification.  I hate to sound like a rules lawyer, but by the letter of the law, a blank slate re-roll with no qualifier (like re-roll 1s) would allow you to re-roll one or all of the dice based on the wording of the BRB.

I feel like this is the flip side to our disagreement about how Tau overwatch last edition allowed a flamer to fire further than it's 8" template.  You argued the letter of the law while I argued the spirit of the law.

[Wyddr]

I'm *still* arguing the letter of the law. "The charge" is "the charge." You are taking the spirit of a sidebar comment in the BRB over the very specific rules in the index.

To take another perspective, here: if you have to re-roll 1s to hit (as per a lot of little rules) and are shooting a plasma gun on overcharge but you *want* your guy to die, can you decline to re-roll the 1 you get? Say you get two 1s--can I re-roll one of them but not the other and achieve my aim?

The "some or all" thing you're hanging your argument on would allow you to *not* re-roll the dice at all if you didn't want to, which of course is against both the spirit *and* the letter of the rules.

I would argue that the same principle applies to Ere We Go: the charge is 2d6". If it is failed, you re-roll "the charge." Not part of the charge--the charge. It is notable that the word "can" is applied to Ere We Go--meaning you may or you may not, depending on other factors that may change your mind (overwatch, for instance). This would furthermore imply that, for other rules that lack such a modifier, the re-rolling is not optional. This, of course, contradicts the "some or all" principle as well--you don't have a choice.

I stand by my reading of the rules. The sidebar piece is a general overview accounting for variations in how re-roll rules are applied and when, not a stipulation allowing you to selectively interpret re-rolls to your best advantage. 

Edit: Just to add some additional evidence to my interpretation here, the Runes of the Farseer rules (in the Eldrad or Farseer datasheet) take care to specify "any number" of the dice being re-rolled in a psychic test. If the default state of re-rolls were to follow the "some or all" thing, then no such stipulation would be required. 

[Roboknee77]

I will admit, my point of view may be a hold over from the previous edition which allowed a re-roll of only one die.  Like my view on disembarking was wholly last edition.  I've submitted the question to the Warhammer 40K Facebook page, so I may get a reply.  I fully expect them to rule as you see it because I hear Orks can't have nice things. 

With your example I could counter argue that if you didn't want to re-roll the one you didn't have to because the roll say you may re-roll the 1s.  It is not a command, that you must re-roll the 1s, but gives you permission to re-roll the 1s.

Your edit, about Eldar rules, would give credence to your interpretation.  I fully expect it didn't come up much in play-testing since we all "know" major tournament players didn't use Orks in tournaments so why would they play test with them? 

All said, from looking at other forums and other sites, this is a topic that has come up on some of them.  The replies are split but the majority seems to lean in my direction.  But, by invoking another rule, I say the next time we play, if there is no reply from the official facebook page, we roll off for whose version is used until it is resolved?

[Wyddr]

Totally fair, yes--the roll-off is acceptable.

With your example I could counter argue that if you didn't want to re-roll the one you didn't have to because the roll say you may re-roll the 1s.  It is not a command, that you must re-roll the 1s, but gives you permission to re-roll the 1s.

Except it totally *is* a command. It says "re-roll 1s." There is no "may" or "can" or anything. It's just a straight command.

[Blazinghand]

It seems somewhat likely to me that the intention was:

1. The BRB rule is written the way it is to describe the possibility of only SOME dice being subject to reroll. For example, if you have "reroll misses" from Guide, then you don't reroll ALL the dice, just the misses. "some or all of the dice" means "[depending on the rule in question] you may re-roll some or all of the dice."

2. The Ork rule is about rerolling the 2d6, so it falls into the "all of the dice" category, rather than the "some of the dice" category that Guide would.

RAW is a different story. I think that, RAW, both interpretations are not wrong. The wording is ambiguous. When it says "some or all of the dice" literally this could means you could reroll some of the eligible dice if you wanted, or literally this could mean "depending on the rules, some or all" and it's not clear based on the literal wording which is literally true.

[Wyddr]

Yeah, I generally agree with Blazinghand here. The wording in the sidebar is super ambiguous. The thing is that the wording *everywhere else* is not. If we're going to lean anywhere, I'd lean towards the way less ambiguous wording.

[Blazinghand]

Yeah, certainly the way I have been playing it with my friends (and we went over this during my second game with my Orks IIRC) is that the re-roll is a complete re-roll of the 2d6.

[dog_of_war]

I agree with Wyddr and Blazinghand for the interpretation of the Rule as Intended. Giving the ork player the choice to reroll one or both becomes way more powerful than the previous edition iteration.

The issue is in the rules as written. The ambiguity leaves too much to interpretation. An issue when you try and make simplified versions of rules. Personally, I would run it as roll both die, because that is what is intended. I would however, not be able to sufficiently counter the interpretation the other way because of how it is written.

Reroll = reroll some or all dice.

Orks may (reroll) on a failed charge roll.

Orks may (reroll some or all dice) on a failed charge roll.

A roll off seems fair before the start of the game. I am very interested how GW will respond to your question.

[The GrimSqueaker]

The new FAQ has this one sorted.

[Wyddr]

The new FAQ has this one sorted.

New FAQ? What new FAQ?

[The GrimSqueaker]

Updated FAQs and Boots on the Ground – Warhammer Community

[Wyddr]

Gotcha--thanks!

Vindication!