N18 Compendium YAQ (N18)

[Thorgor]

There is the same issue with any skill/ability/trait/tactic card that allows you to reroll a hit, wound or injury roll.

Only Wound rolls and only when it succeeds on a 5- but rolling a natural 6 would change the Save or Injury roll.
Problems can only arise if the player is given information too soon and that information can influence a choice they have to make. You will always reroll a failed Hit or Wound roll so knowing beforehand what was rolled for Save and Injury doesn't change anything. And since there is nothing after the Injury roll (that is fast-rolled), you are not given any extra information that could change your choice.

Horizontal fast-rolling creates more of the same issue btw, as you know all the result of all the Wound rolls at the same time.

 

[almic85]

Only Wound rolls and only when it succeeds on a 5- but rolling a natural 6 would change the Save or Injury roll.
Problems can only arise if the player is given information too soon and that information can influence a choice they have to make. You will always reroll a failed Hit or Wound roll so knowing beforehand what was rolled for Save and Injury doesn't change anything. And since there is nothing after the Injury roll (that is fast-rolled), you are not given any extra information that could change your choice.

Horizontal fast-rolling creates more of the same issue btw, as you know all the result of all the Wound rolls at the same time.

If I have the parry skill I can force the attacker to reroll a single close combat attack. Why would I force the attacker to reroll a successful hit roll if I already know he is going to fail the wound roll or if I know I am going to pass the save roll?

A similar thing happens if I am the attacker with master crafted close combat weapon that allows a single reroll of the to hit rolls. Why would I reroll the to hit dice if I know the wound roll is unsuccessful or the save is going to be successful?

I can see what you are saying about horizontal fast rolling also having an issue in that both sides can see the results of all the hit rolls before deciding which, if any, of the dice need to be rerolled, but I just see that is a lesser issue for whatever reason.

 

[Thorgor]

If I have the parry skill I can force the attacker to reroll a single close combat attack. Why would I force the attacker to reroll a successful hit roll if I already know he is going to fail the wound roll or if I know I am going to pass the save roll?

You don't know. As I said multiple times already, all hit rolls happen before any single hit is resolved.
If the same kind of ability existed for Wound rolls, then it could be a problem, yes.

A similar thing happens if I am the attacker with master crafted close combat weapon that allows a single reroll of the to hit rolls. Why would I reroll the to hit dice if I know the wound roll is unsuccessful or the save is going to be successful?

As I said above, it doesn't matter for Hit rolls. But even if the same ability existed for Wound rolls, it wouldn't be an issue. Just reroll everything that follows the failed Wound roll at the same time you reroll the Wound roll (there is no information to be gained from a roll that wouldn't have happened in the original timeline).

So, to sum up, issues can only arise if one of those is true:

• an ability allows the defender to reroll failed Save rolls
• an ability can force the attacker to reroll successful Wound rolls
• an ability allows the attacker to reroll successful Wound rolls to fish for a natural 6

 

[almic85]

Sorry. Had to go back and reread the last row earlier pages to get which dice were being rolled vertically and which were horizontal.

The only rules I can think of that would cause the above issues are the Chaos Cult blessing of Khorne (that allows a wound roll re-roll for the attacker to fish for 6’s) and the lucky lho stick tactic card (which allows the defender to reroll armour saves).

There might be a few others hiding in the latest books (judgement and ruin) that I haven’t/can’t scrounge through at the moment.

Anyway this isn’t really the thread for me to argue about rolling dice and I agree with your RAW interpretation of the TGB rule, though I don’t think they actually play it that way.

I think that the rules writers actually just resolve each step (to hit, to wound, save rolls, injury rolls) at the same time which is why they didn’t realise that the target would be pinned by the first shot.

 

[Thorgor]

I think that the rules writers actually just resolve each step (to hit, to wound, save rolls, injury rolls) at the same time which is why they didn’t realise that the target would be pinned by the first shot.

Well, the pre-FAQ version of TGB was quite clear that you had to completely resolve the first hit before you started resolving the second one. I think it's more likely they forgot that a fighter who is both pinned and in cover cannot be targeted.

But yeah, it's not really the place for discussing how dice are to be rolled. Sorry this digression has gone on for so long.

So, practical considerations aside, do you guys agree that the following is the most likely RAI?

• all multi-hit attacks should be resolved the same way (close-combat attacks, twin-guns blazing, rapid fire, scattershot, etc.)
• the new FAQ suggests that all Hit rolls are rolled first and are then entirely resolved one at a time (i.e. the sequence would be (H1+H2) => W1->S1->I1 => W2->S2->I2)
• the attacker chooses the order hits are resolved

I do find this hybrid sequencing quite strange, but it's also technically how it's written in the Close combat (and Shooting) rules (all hits are resolved during step 5 (3), and 'each attack that scores a hit is resolved' during step 6 (5)). At the very least, it's clear that all Hit rolls are made before any Wound roll is made.

 

[almic85]

I still think that they intended for all the injury dice to be rolled at the same time or at the very least that even if the fighter is taken out of action by the first shot (edit: I mean hit) that the rest of the hits are also fully resolved.

It’s also worth noting that step 5 of close combat (make hit rolls) specifically tells you to “roll separately for different weapons and/or different targets” so it is open if you should resolve all the weapons and/or targets hit rolls in step 5 before moving onto resolving the successful hits in step 6.

For consistency (and ease) I think you should and it would align with what you have suggested above.

 

[Jaraii]

I agree with the wording that you used Thorgor.

 

[MusingWarboss]

Hi. Can I just say, as far as I can see from the Book of Chains they have dispensed with fighters starting with armour. You can choose to buy some from the weapon list for that fighter class.

So, unless I missed it, that should clear up that old debate @Thorgor.

No more deducting starting “free” armour.

 

[TopsyKretts]

It's almost like they... listen? First we couldn't buy any armour. A year later, we got armour to buy. Then we didn't know how to remove/upgrade armour. A year later, we get fighters without armour.

 

[Thorgor]

OK guys. I'm officially giving up on the Books of _____ series (I mean, I've given up on them a long time ago if I'm honest, but let's make it official.)

With the new codex being on the same quality-level as the N18 rulebook (i.e. rather good, with only a few problems that need fixing), here is what I plan to do for the coming months:

• Definitely close the N18 YAQ (and abandon this thread)
• Create a new document titled the N20 YAQ (and open a new thread to discuss it)

The N20 YAQ scope will be drastically reduced to avoid any nervous-breakdown on my end (and hopefully produce a completed document at some point, for a change). Only the following publications will be considered part of the N20 canon:

• the N18 rulebook (except for the parts that are superseded by the codices, like how Juves are to be promoted), until a newer stand-alone rulebook is released (Dark Uprising doesn't count)
• House of Chains and subsequent codices as they are released
• any weapon profiles and equipment description from Gangs of the Underhive/The Book of <whatever> if and only if they are explicitly available to one of the gangs whose codex has been released (in other words, items from the Trading Post and Black Market) — hopefully, this will be soon replaced by a living online resource
• Any item from the official FAQ that pertains to the aforementioned publications

To be clear, this will have the following consequences:

• for the time being, only House Goliath and Slave Ogryn gangs will be covered by the N20 YAQ. I'm not gonna bother with questions like "can other gangs take a House Agent?" since other gangs don't exist as far as the N20 YAQ is concerned.
• gangs like Venators, Enforcers and Cults may be left out for a very long time (maybe forever), depending on whether or not they get an update in one of the codices (or their own codex). If they get a free online or WD update, I'll consider adding it to the scope
• the only Tactics cards the N20 YAQ will care about are the ones whose rules are directly available in the codices (for the moment, that's only the 18 Goliath cards found in House of Chains). I'm finally free of those horribly worded cards whose horrible original wording is so hard to find!

 

[Gi11gamesh]

@Thorgor your work is legend. Keep it up man!!

 

[Jaraii]

I would maybe petition to still cover the cults/venators/enforcers, though only in regards to how any new stuff affects them, since their respective books are likely their final forms. Still would be minor coverage admittedly.

 

[Jaraii]

Also, maybe the N18 YAQ wouldn't necessarily need corrections from the core book, since they'd be covered in the N20 document. This would prevent conflicts from future corrections like what happened with the discussion expanding the TGB ruling, and could make the focus be the supplements.

Those are my 2 cents on the matter. I appreciate all you've been doing on this.

 

[MusingWarboss]

May have been YAQed a long time ago but a quick Q about the “Deadlock” Tactics card.

It says to discard if drawn for a Zone Mortalis game BUT it’s a card specifically for locking doors.

Wouldn’t this make more sense IN a ZM game where openable doors are way more likely to be present rather than Sector Mechanicus where you may not even have any doors on the table and if you did you’re probably not interactive much.

What was the consensus, did they get this the wrong way round?? It feels like it.

 

[TopsyKretts]

It would make more sense yes. Tactics Cards are unfortunately not known to be the most sensible.

 

[MusingWarboss]

It even says “board” on it, which I associate with ZM, rather than “table” which is more usually used for... well... anything else.

 

[TopsyKretts]

Some cards have the correct ZM/SM limitation. Some are missing. And some have the incorrect (like you describe).

I very recently started playing Warhammer Underworlds and surprised to see all the rules and card quality invested there. Nothing left for Necromunda

 

[RonBSM]

Asking as its quicker than reading 24 pages...

A sidearm trait weapon with rapid fire....

You roll the firepower dice in close combat when you use it, fine... thats for checking ammo in almost all cases, but does the rapid fire trait kick in if you roll 2 or 3 on the firepower dice in close combat?

For instance, Autopistols and Sub-Lascarbines... pistols with rapid fire traits....

 

[Vonvilkee]

Asking as its quicker than reading 24 pages...

A sidearm trait weapon with rapid fire....

You roll the firepower dice in close combat when you use it, fine... thats for checking ammo in almost all cases, but does the rapid fire trait kick in if you roll 2 or 3 on the firepower dice in close combat?

For instance, Autopistols and Sub-Lascarbines... pistols with rapid fire traits....

Yep more than one hit

 

[RonBSM]

Yep more than one hit

That makes rapid fire sidearms potentially amazing in CC. up to 3 hits?

Ouch...