Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WWHSD

Avoid frustration and wait to roll the die from Lightweight Frame.

Recommended Posts

Unless there is a legit reason for taking more time to roll 2 then roll 1 more, which currently there is 0 triggers off rolling defense dice besides light frame, i dont care im not wasting my time.

Its no different than literally any other bonus dice situation. You grab your initial number then state the extra dice. Even if i have SD i dont silently grab dice, i usually go "Stealth device...." in a gleeful manner or "Four for me!" indicating im not grabbing my printed agility.

Yes, the rules technically are different. It literally DOES NOT MATTER and just wastes time. When you have 3-4 ships with LF and you get that benefit every attack (just about), those 1-2 seconds extra add up quick.

 

Anyone who demands i reroll my dice until theres a trigger im skipping over is only going to tell me to do that if i rolled well. Guarantee nobody will say a **** thing if i rolled like ass.

 

Most TOs i know would rule it to be ok as far as i know them if that was really only matter of 3vs2+1.

 

I have trouble believing that most TOs would look at a situation where the rules were clearly not followed and that has a specific remedy included in the rules and say to just ignore it. They may not be happy to have to side with the asshat but if they are enforcing the rules of X-Wing they pretty much need to.

 

Play the card as written and it is a non-issue.

 

I have no idea what most TOs would do, I know my usually TOs would tell the nitpicker to shut up and play. Literally. ;-)

Unless there is a trigger between. the steps. If there is a trigger between things change dramatically and that is the best reason to keep your play clean. Best habits only become habits if you make them your habits. So you still have a point, even when every TO I know would tell a rules lawyer to shut up even in more extreme examples as when someone first moves his tie swarm and assigns his focus tokens afterwards. (if he stated that intention before moving the second one).

 

It is still sloppy play, I can't recommend doing it, but I don't think I know anyone who would not accept this kind of sloppiness as correct enough. Now if you decide afterwards that you want to do a barrel roll instead with number 3  … better not play sloppy as it is calling for trouble.  

 

 

 

 

if you dont correct it when its not convenient for you, you cant correct it when it is convenient.

 

That is simply untrue.  It may make you a WAAC player, but the rules don't say anything about needing to correct something at the first opportunity or losing the ability to fix it later.

Not sure on that one. Has the newest faq not declared that both players are now responsible to maintain a correct game state and share public game state information. I guess you are still correct, but I would not bet money on it, and I certainly would not bet money on all TOs ruling it in your way. Some might tell you to shut up and your opponent to fix his sloppy play for the following turns.

Edited by SEApocalypse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats not the point and you know it, Vanor.

 

Theres a difference in beating your opponent through upgrade shenanigans and rule loopholes. You are abusing a rule loophole if you are choosing to not correct something because it might hurt you at one point, and then correct it when it might help you in the exact same situation with different dice results later.

 

If i TO'd a tournament and i got called over for this, it would be strongly dependent on time. If the match started ~20 minutes ago, it was probably the first roll so i'd go with the attacking player since its technically how the rules are. If it was later, and especially if i saw damage on the ship in question with LF, i would rule in favor of the defendant with the comment "In future games roll it this way to avoid issues" because at that point you CLEARLY didnt say anything until it benefited you. Which tells me you have to resort to cheap tactics to win rather than playing the game. Save the guy from future problems while simultaneously shafting the nitpicky prick.

Edited by Vineheart01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know my usually TOs would tell the nitpicker to shut up and play.

I don't know that I'd care to play in events with TO's like that. A TO should enforce the Rules As Written, not based on their personal sense of what's fair. What if they decide that being able to nest PtL type actions isn't fair?

 

It still sloppy play, I can't recommend doing it

I can't see why picking up three dice, rolling two, then the 3rd one after they stop bouncing is such a big deal. that would take all of half a second longer and even with 4 ships it's not going to have an impact on the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your what if scenario is irrelevant especially when they are such a stretch as your what-if, I trust my TO to make rational calls aka RAI.

edit:

And btw, it takes literally just a fraction of a second longer as you can hold 3 dice, roll 2 and before the two stop rolling roll already the third dice. So it is indeed not a big deal, but so is remembering to clear all the focus token at the end of turn or assign on turn 1 all tokens in the correct order. No one cares about that either usually. People play sloppy because their mind is on other things than maintain a perfect order of things which creates extra steps of things to do.

Edited by SEApocalypse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your what if scenario is irrelevant especially when they are such a stretch as your what-if,

I got into a debate with a TO about exactly that issue a year or so ago. He simply refused to accept that you could nest a PtL action and get two stress after the fact. So it's not even remotely far fetched, it's based on personal experience.

RAI is a slippery slope and should be avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A TO isnt there to enforce rules to the T, theyre there to enforce a fun and fair time. TOs make calls all the freakin time that are either hazy, via email but not in the faq, or solve a situation that has to be resolved on the spot where rules really cant help (rare).

For instance, the Uwing technically can legally turn around then do a 2fwd when stressed. Every TO i know has told me if someone tries that in their tournaments (and they always make it known what shenanigans they wont put up with) theyre getting DQ'd because that is CLEARLY not intended, even if RAW it works.

 

This isnt 40k. If you want a 100% RAW tournament, go play 40k. You'll come back to xwing's casual RAI mentality in seconds. 40k games are 80% bickering over a rule, 5% moving models, 15% rolling dice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A TO isnt there to enforce rules to the T, theyre there to enforce a fun and fair time.

No they are not. They are there to make sure the event runs smoothly. Fun is not their problem. Fair is that everyone plays by the rules.

 

For instance, the Uwing technically can legally turn around then do a 2fwd when stressed. Every TO i know has told me if someone tries that in their tournaments (and they always make it known what shenanigans they wont put up with) theyre getting DQ'd because that is CLEARLY not intended, even if RAW it works.

That is exactly the kind of abuse of power that I'm talking about. They can not now what is intended, but they can know what the rules quite clearly say. Now they have the authority to make that decision, but they are not doing the right thing by doing so, because until FFG says something we can't actually know what's intended, and DQ'ing someone based on your personal opinion is the worse kind of abuse of power.

Myself I'd never play in an event with TO's like that, because you have gone way beyond Fly Casual and into "Play based on my arbitrary sense of what's fair" Just like the TO who refused to accept you could nest PtL.

Edited by VanorDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, no one has ever tried that nonsense with me, nor have I ever done it.  The people who do this are the wannabes that know they aren't good enough to play at the top tables, so they resort to trickery to get some dice or acrylics.

 

That being said, you should either verbally say "I'm rolling 2 agility + 1 lightweight die" or roll the die separately, anyway.  I like verbally confirming that I'm rolling the right amount of dice due to range, or obstructions, or whatever.  Talk more!

This is exactly what I do; every turn if I execute a maneuver or am about to roll, I talk so that "if" I interpete something incorrectly myself, or my opponent doesn't understand it can be explained and or corrected immediately. Glad to hear a world class player does the same. It makes me appreciate the competition even more 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every TO i know has told me if someone tries that in their tournaments (and they always make it known what shenanigans they wont put up with) theyre getting DQ'd because that is CLEARLY not intended, even if RAW it works.

 

DQing people for doing exactly what the rules say to do because you don't agree with the rules seems to me to be much worse than making sure that the rules are applied even when it might be distasteful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their tournament, their word on skeptical rulings. Dont like it? Leave.

 

I never question what the TO says in my games. I may not like it, but i do not have the right to question their call. If it causes issues because i feel like theyre making crap up i just leave and find other places to go.

 

Had an escal tourney before the recent FAQ dropped where the TO ruled a boost/barrelroll does not induce obstacle penalties (damage, stress, loss of action) if you have Collision Detector, even though its one of those things that makes 0 sense. Besides that TO i didnt meet anybody that ruled it that way, but he was the TO, i was not, so i kept my mouth shut and played the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That being said, you should either verbally say "I'm rolling 2 agility + 1 lightweight die" or roll the die separately, anyway.

Exactly. While I think anyone calling someone on this is being a bit of a jerk. I also think anyone who can't do something as simple as what Paul says here is just as much part of the problem.

If you make it clear what you're doing, then at least the other person has a chance to point out why you may not be able to do that, if there is no reason then they can't call you on it after the fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their tournament, their word on skeptical rulings. Dont like it? Leave.

 

I never question what the TO says in my games. I may not like it, but i do not have the right to question their call. If it causes issues because i feel like theyre making crap up i just leave and find other places to go.

 

Had an escal tourney before the recent FAQ dropped where the TO ruled a boost/barrelroll does not induce obstacle penalties (damage, stress, loss of action) if you have Collision Detector, even though its one of those things that makes 0 sense. Besides that TO i didnt meet anybody that ruled it that way, but he was the TO, i was not, so i kept my mouth shut and played the game.

 

Before the recent FAQ, hitting an obstacle with a boost/barrel-roll didn't actually trigger any obstacle penalties by the rules. People that were applying penalties were applying what they thought the rules should be and not what they actually were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your what if scenario is irrelevant especially when they are such a stretch as your what-if,

I got into a debate with a TO about exactly that issue a year or so ago. He simply refused to accept that you could nest a PtL action and get two stress after the fact. So it's not even remotely far fetched, it's based on personal experience.

RAI is a slippery slope and should be avoided.

It absolutely is far fetched as you were speaking about MY TO. I trust my TO not yours. They have earned that trust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Wait what...? 

Unless being total jerk just for being jerk, what is the difference if you roll 3 dice at once or 2 then 1 in this case? Did i miss any interaction? All mods happen after, this wording is strictly there for not abusing range 3...

 

If anyone would make me reroll "framed" roll just cause i didn't roll 2+1 i would tell him to fk himself, period.

I get that, it's just that the rules allow for some exploitation. The question is not about what is the right thing to do or who is a jerk (I think we agree that is fairly obvious, although I would use the term 'WAAC player' rather than 'jerk'), but how to prevent the situation in the first place.

And how to resolve it. 'Go [whatever] yourself' is not a solution.

 

Yea well this scenario thrown me off balance a little as we can see ;)

 

Well is there really any resolution that makes sense?

You both are right:

- demanding to reroll such a roll is correct by the rules

- demanding to let it stay is correct by sportsmanship and common sense.

 

In a casual - i would tell the opponent what part of male anatomy i would compare him to and pack the bags (ofc only if someone insisted - simply saying: "could you roll 2+1 not 3 next time, please" would be perfectly ok.)

In tournament - call the TO to judge. Most TOs i know would rule it to be ok as far as i know them if that was really only matter of 3vs2+1.

 

There is no reroll by the rules. If someone wants to argue the letter of the law on an action that has no impact they still can't in this issue. The rules do not denote what causes "after" to happen. Normally it is defined as the phase ending or some other resolution but this is after within the same step so there is no "you must wait X seconds" or "you must make two distinct actions" before rolling the extra die. Therefore, the last die to hit is just as after as making a secondary gesture to pick up and roll a die by itself. They both meet the same "after" requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know my usually TOs would tell the nitpicker to shut up and play.

I don't know that I'd care to play in events with TO's like that. A TO should enforce the Rules As Written, not based on their personal sense of what's fair. What if they decide that being able to nest PtL type actions isn't fair?
To some degree, I hope that any judge uses his/her own good judgement to temper strict rules. It's one of the reasons we tend to leave judgement to people rather than machines. But the rule is quite clear in this regard; the card explicitly says how the dice should be rolled and anyone who assumes a judge will rule against the wording of the card is not being reasonable. "Hey TO, this player calls me a jerk and a WAAC player just because I asked him to roll the dice as the card says!" A person who just arrives at such a table can very well decide to fall back on the rules and force the player with LF to reroll the dice.

There is a tendency in this and similar topics to expect that a TO will rule in a way that conforms to our sense of fairness. There is no reason to believe this. Especially when the letter of the rules is unambiguous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It absolutely is far fetched as you were speaking about MY TO.

No I wasn't. I was talking about some generic TO that you may or may not run into. The fact that you trust yours doesn't mean anything, since you may not be playing in events that he runs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It's entirely possible that an opponent will allow you to roll all the dice at once without comment all game long until you have a very good roll at a critical time. 

 

Yeh, this is what I did last night. Guy was so **** salty.

 

if you dont correct it when its not convenient for you, you cant correct it when it is convenient. You had several opportunities to tell him to roll 2 + 1 but you chose to wait until he had a good roll? You, sir, are the definition of a WAAC. You cant decide to be lenient over a simple thing like 2+1 vs 3 one time and be uber strict about it the next.

 

 

Not being able to correct something later in the game because you missed an opportunity to correct it earlier in the game opens an even bigger hole for WAAC players.

 

If a player with Palob with HSCP and TLT attacks with TLT and tells the defender that just rolled that they must spend a focus on defense and the defender complies does that mean that for the rest of that match HSCP triggers when attacking with a secondary weapon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It absolutely is far fetched as you were speaking about MY TO.

No I wasn't. I was talking about some generic TO that you may or may not run into. The fact that you trust yours doesn't mean anything, since you may not be playing in events that he runs.

"I know my usually TOs would tell the nitpicker to shut up and play." He answered to that and added "what if they [do some stupid ****]". It is far fetched, it is even far fetched to any general TO, because he could have ask as well "what if they DQ anyone they don't like to keep the prices within their local friends".

Making outlandish claims what someone could do, does not help at all. Especially when the rules give the TO the right to do even the most outlandish stuff anyway. ;-)

And I am absolutely sure that there is at least one TO which ruled a whole tourney unfair to help their friends, just because it happens sometimes, does not make it any not far fetched as an argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to change the subject... Here is a question I have regarding timing of Lightwieght Frame with Zuckuss. The LWF card indicates after the defense roll add another defense dice. Does that mean zuckuss has to first be initiated before the 3rd die is rolled. Technically, Zuckuss is done before the modify step. Does adding another die constitute a modification of the defense roll?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Wait what...? 

Unless being total jerk just for being jerk, what is the difference if you roll 3 dice at once or 2 then 1 in this case? Did i miss any interaction? All mods happen after, this wording is strictly there for not abusing range 3...

 

If anyone would make me reroll "framed" roll just cause i didn't roll 2+1 i would tell him to fk himself, period.

I get that, it's just that the rules allow for some exploitation. The question is not about what is the right thing to do or who is a jerk (I think we agree that is fairly obvious, although I would use the term 'WAAC player' rather than 'jerk'), but how to prevent the situation in the first place.

And how to resolve it. 'Go [whatever] yourself' is not a solution.

 

Yea well this scenario thrown me off balance a little as we can see ;)

 

Well is there really any resolution that makes sense?

You both are right:

- demanding to reroll such a roll is correct by the rules

- demanding to let it stay is correct by sportsmanship and common sense.

 

In a casual - i would tell the opponent what part of male anatomy i would compare him to and pack the bags (ofc only if someone insisted - simply saying: "could you roll 2+1 not 3 next time, please" would be perfectly ok.)

In tournament - call the TO to judge. Most TOs i know would rule it to be ok as far as i know them if that was really only matter of 3vs2+1.

 

There is no reroll by the rules. If someone wants to argue the letter of the law on an action that has no impact they still can't in this issue. The rules do not denote what causes "after" to happen. Normally it is defined as the phase ending or some other resolution but this is after within the same step so there is no "you must wait X seconds" or "you must make two distinct actions" before rolling the extra die. Therefore, the last die to hit is just as after as making a secondary gesture to pick up and roll a die by itself. They both meet the same "after" requirement.

 

 

You rolled the dice at the same time. There is no way to identify which die was the extra die from Lightweight Frame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Therefore, the last die to hit is just as after as making a secondary gesture to pick up and roll a die by itself. They both meet the same "after" requirement.

That argument makes you as much a rules lawyer as the person calling you on it. After rolling the dice has a clear meaning to all reasonable people. But as Paul pointed out, just declaring what the dice are is going to be good enough.

  

There is a tendency in this and similar topics to expect that a TO will rule in a way that conforms to our sense of fairness. There is no reason to believe this. Especially when the letter of the rules is unambiguous.

That's exactly my point. I wouldn't want to play with a TO who feels it's ok to throw out the RAW in favor of their personal sense of RAI. Not when the RAW is actually quite clear.

 

When RAW is unclear then yes the TO needs to make a decision and ideally announce the decision ahead of time.  But a TO who DQ's someone for someone making a K-Turn with a U-Wing is quite frankly someone who IMO shouldn't be a TO.  Even if I agree that the likely FAQ will prevent such a thing, the RAW right now clearly allow it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to change the subject... Here is a question I have regarding timing of Lightwieght Frame with Zuckuss. The LWF card indicates after the defense roll add another defense dice. Does that mean zuckuss has to first be initiated before the 3rd die is rolled. Technically, Zuckuss is done before the modify step. Does adding another die constitute a modification of the defense roll?

 

No, Zuckuss would add the die on the initial roll. The "Roll Defense Dice" step is where effects that add or subtract dice take place.

 

Adding dice is not a modification. There are exactly three things that are modifications:

 

1. Adding dice results.

2. Changing dice results.

3. Rerolling dice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I am absolutely sure that there is at least one TO which ruled a whole tourney unfair to help their friends, just because it happens sometimes, does not make it any not far fetched as an argument.

If it happens, and you know it happens, and you don't know the TO in question, then it's not really that far fetched. If you have a TO who will DQ someone for playing RAW then very little is far fetched.

Edit: I guess my point is, I'd rather play with a TO that adheres to the RAW because then everyone knows what to expect. When they start using RAI especially when it is directly contrary to the RAW you never know what you'll get and people who aren't part of that local community are likely to find stuff doesn't work like they think it should.

Edited by VanorDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...