Jump to content
QuickWhit

Re-opening the Darnati Warrior reroll discussion

Recommended Posts

Greetings rune warriors!

I know this issue has been pretty heavily discussed already. However the new article about Prince Faolin had reopened the discussion in my group, and I wanted to see if it had changed anybody else's mind.

Prince Faolin had the same text on his card as Darnati Warriors: 

"After rerolls you must remove 1 die."

In his release article it states:

"However, this power must be tempered, and after rerolling any dice, he must remove one die."

Half of my group sees this as proof positive that Darnati do not have to remove a die if they don't reroll.

I'm on the fence. I know that release articles are often full of inaccuracies. I also see the argument that "rerolls" could be referring to step 4 of the attack process in the rules.

However, the text reads pretty heavily in favor of them keeping the die if they don't reroll... If FFG intended them to always remove a die, there are so many ways they could have worded it to make it clearer.

"After step 4 (rerolls) you must remove 1 die."

Or

"Before assigning damage you must remove 1 die."

I could come up with many others.

Interested in everyone else's thoughts on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Additionally, as per X-wing lingo, I think a case could be made that "rerolling 0 dice" would fall under the category of "rerolling any dice." True, it doesn't say "any number," the way X-wing does, but I think that's the proper way to interpret that section of the preview article. I am almost positive that "rerolls" refers to step 4 of an attack.

Also, I think Wraiths get really weird if, while defending, you could reroll [stable] dice before each time the attacker rerolls. Because then the ability completely shuts down against enemies who get no rerolls when attacking, and that just feels bad EDIT: as a Waiqar player.

Edited by Parakitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rebellightworks said:

Preview Articles are neither rules text or FAQ/clarifications.

 

Also, they routinely get things wrong. According to the article, you measure movement for Dead Sprint from the back of the tray.

I noted their previous inaccuracies in my post. I very much remember having a good laugh at the flesh rippers article. I take the information in these articles with an appropriate amount of salt.

However saying that they are full of inaccuracies is not the same as saying they are always wrong. Certainly they have identified many things in the release articles that are correct, but we don't point those out because they are not interesting. In this case I don't know that it is safe to assume that the article is wrong without first assuming that the Darnati have to discard 1 die whether they reroll our not. I'm lookng for evidence that the card should be interpreted that way, not evidence that the article could be incorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Parakitor said:

Additionally, as per X-wing lingo, I think a case could be made that "rerolling 0 dice" would fall under the category of "rerolling any dice." True, it doesn't say "any number," the way X-wing does, but I think that's the proper way to interpret that section of the preview article. I am almost positive that "rerolls" refers to step 4 of an attack.

Also, I think Wraiths get really weird if, while defending, you could reroll [stable] dice before each time the attacker rerolls. Because then the ability completely shuts down against enemies who get no rerolls when attacking, and that just feels bad EDIT: as a Waiqar player.

Thank you for this. The wraith part of this argument is the part that has me starting to lean towards them discarding the die every time. It's just too clunky otherwise.

The wraiths have to wait until the attacker decides to reroll (maybe just one die) and then they jump in and say "wait me first!" They reroll a different die then the one the attacker was gonna reroll. Then the attacker say "well now ima reroll both of them..."  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to stick with the interpretation that reroll is referring to the step and not the act of rerolling. Wraiths reroll before reroll step, darnati and Faolan remove a die after reroll step.

The die face fishing that it allows is really good, so I'm pretty sure that's how it's meant to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, QuickWhit said:

Thank you for this. The wraith part of this argument is the part that has me starting to lean towards them discarding the die every time. It's just too clunky otherwise.

The wraiths have to wait until the attacker decides to reroll (maybe just one die) and then they jump in and say "wait me first!" They reroll a different die then the one the attacker was gonna reroll. Then the attacker say "well now ima reroll both of them..."  

 

Its definetly adressing the step of the combat phase

 otherwise wraighs would die to lucky single rank attack rolls and in all  games they adress the particular step of the attack. And back to topic: im sure that darnati will always have to remove one die. If they didnt they wpuld specify that on the card itself ,,if you reroll ... remove one die"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, QuickWhit said:

I noted their previous inaccuracies in my post. I very much remember having a good laugh at the flesh rippers article. I take the information in these articles with an appropriate amount of salt.

However saying that they are full of inaccuracies is not the same as saying they are always wrong. Certainly they have identified many things in the release articles that are correct, but we don't point those out because they are not interesting. In this case I don't know that it is safe to assume that the article is wrong without first assuming that the Darnati have to discard 1 die whether they reroll our not. I'm lookng for evidence that the card should be interpreted that way, not evidence that the article could be incorrect.

Knowing that they're full of blatant errors means they should never be treated as rules text. Sure, they get things right often enough, but they are not rulings, that's for rules text. From a rules perspective, disregard them entirely: they are marketing pieces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bhelliom said:

Knowing that they're full of blatant errors means they should never be treated as rules text. Sure, they get things right often enough, but they are not rulings, that's for rules text. From a rules perspective, disregard them entirely: they are marketing pieces.

Not sure where the idea that I'm taking release articles as rules text is coming from.  It is just information about units.  Sometimes it's accurate.  Sometimes it's not.  But just throwing it out and saying "they don't know what they are talking about" doesn't further the argument in any way.

Everyone seems to be treating the current accepted interpretation of how the Darnati's dice mechanic works (that they must remove a die after step 4 of the attack phase) as something that is in the rules... and it's just not.  The reason this conversation exists is because it is NOT clarified anywhere.  I want to play the game correctly, but I also want the people I am playing with to feel good about our collective interpretation of the rules.  I also cannot force my interpretation of the rules on them.  They strongly believe that the Darnati do not have to remove a die if they do not reroll.

Again, I'm leaning toward the accepted interpretation (that they have to remove a die even if they don't reroll).  It makes sense to me that the term "rerolls" is referring to step 4, and this jives with the logical interpretation of how the wraith's defensive mechanic works.  But disregarding evidence to the contrary (such as the release article) when there is no proof positive that the opposite interpretation is correct will not win any arguments. 

Can anyone here honestly say that they don't see where the confusion comes from?  Is this just an "I've been playing FFG products for years and this is how they typically do it" thing?  Most of us in my group are new to FFG games...

I guess I am looking for a silver bullet piece of evidence that will solve the issue, one way or the other.  But it seems I'll have to wait for the FAQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, QuickWhit said:

Not sure where the idea that I'm taking release articles as rules text is coming from.  It is just information about units.  Sometimes it's accurate.  Sometimes it's not.  But just throwing it out and saying "they don't know what they are talking about" doesn't further the argument in any way.

Everyone seems to be treating the current accepted interpretation of how the Darnati's dice mechanic works (that they must remove a die after step 4 of the attack phase) as something that is in the rules... and it's just not.  The reason this conversation exists is because it is NOT clarified anywhere.  I want to play the game correctly, but I also want the people I am playing with to feel good about our collective interpretation of the rules.  I also cannot force my interpretation of the rules on them.  They strongly believe that the Darnati do not have to remove a die if they do not reroll.

Again, I'm leaning toward the accepted interpretation (that they have to remove a die even if they don't reroll).  It makes sense to me that the term "rerolls" is referring to step 4, and this jives with the logical interpretation of how the wraith's defensive mechanic works.  But disregarding evidence to the contrary (such as the release article) when there is no proof positive that the opposite interpretation is correct will not win any arguments. 

Can anyone here honestly say that they don't see where the confusion comes from?  Is this just an "I've been playing FFG products for years and this is how they typically do it" thing?  Most of us in my group are new to FFG games...

I guess I am looking for a silver bullet piece of evidence that will solve the issue, one way or the other.  But it seems I'll have to wait for the FAQ.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I agree that the timing and details of removing the die are ambiguous and need to be addressed in FAQ, what I meant was that this preview article has absolutely no contribution to our understanding of the rules, other than I suppose to remind us of the ambiguity. Basically, it sounds like your group is trying to draw conclusions from the preview article, and that is a baaaaaad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Bhelliom said:

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I agree that the timing and details of removing the die are ambiguous and need to be addressed in FAQ, what I meant was that this preview article has absolutely no contribution to our understanding of the rules, other than I suppose to remind us of the ambiguity. Basically, it sounds like your group is trying to draw conclusions from the preview article, and that is a baaaaaad idea.

I think part of the problem is that we were leaning as a group towards the interpretation that you only remove a die if you reroll based on the ambiguous wording on the card. I was starting to come around to the accepted (on this forum) understanding of how Darnati should behave when the Faolin article came out. Now much of my group is using that article as confirmation of our original interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we were to take the fluff from the Darnati article as evidence, (paraphrasing) 'the Darnati tire after each attack' by this phrasing each reroll would remove a dice, including wraiths rerolling. So Darnati attack wraiths with three dice, wraiths reroll, so Darnati lose a die, then Darnati reroll and lose another die? That's how I would read it if that were actually the way the rule worked, but it's not, fortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jukey said:

If we were to take the fluff from the Darnati article as evidence, (paraphrasing) 'the Darnati tire after each attack' by this phrasing each reroll would remove a dice, including wraiths rerolling. So Darnati attack wraiths with three dice, wraiths reroll, so Darnati lose a die, then Darnati reroll and lose another die? That's how I would read it if that were actually the way the rule worked, but it's not, fortunately.

Between that, FotF, and Unhallowed Wind, I find it perfectly thematic that the pride of the Latari get tired and scared facing ghosts. Then they get more scared once I have beat up one of their friends. 

Edited by Church14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me on any other card when talking about a stage or step it notates that. After the End Phase, Before Activation, Add to Damage pool, I feel like if they wanted this to mean you remove a die even if you don't reroll but just simply because you went through the reroll stage, they would either word it they remove one die before counting hits, or they remove one more die before adding to the damage pool, or something like that. Otherwise I feel they would have said after the Reroll Step. I don't know. It's funny if you take anyone not in this game and ask them to interpret this rule, I guarantee 100% of them will say if you reroll you remove a die and none (even if you show them the steps of actions) would say after the reroll step. We look WAY too into these words and find other meanings.

Though I will say having said all of that, I think 3 dice are too many for an infantry, so this could just be they have better odds of getting good rolls by having more dice to roll initially.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the key changes in X-wing Second Edition was a simplification of the terminology. Instead of "While you have at least 1 shield token," cards now read, "While you are shielded." Another huge example: "When you become the active ship in the Combat Phase," got pared way way down to "When you engage." I strongly feel that this streamlining of terminology was applied to Runewars, but the Rules Reference Guide and FAQ haven't caught up yet.

So far, very few cards reference specific steps of an attack, and the few that do, don't actually call them "steps." See Bloodied Tatters:
Upgrade%20-%20Bloodied%20Tatters.png

"Before spending [surge], if there are 2 wound tokens on this card, add [morale]."

Hmm...so if I don't have any surges to spend, I can't add the morale result? And Wraiths, with whom this card is packaged*, don't have any surge abilities to spend those surges on so.... Yeah, I am pretty darn sure this refers to the "spend surges" step, and that means that the Darnati Warriors' ability also refers to the "reroll for extra ranks" step.

*EDIT: Yes, I'm aware Corruption Rune also comes with Wraiths who have no equipment slot, so the fact that Wraiths have no surge abilities is irrelevant. The important point is that this card is clearly not requiring you to spend surges to add a morale.

Edited by Parakitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 5:45 PM, mikehansenasu said:

Has anyone had an official ruling on this via a tournament?

 

Nope, nothing beyond our normal pub conversation, which generally goes like this:

Uthuk and Waiqar: " You really should remove a dice after the re-roll step mate, even if you decided to skip the re-roll step. . . such a strong unit. . I mean, why does an infantry unit roll three dice? "

Latari Players: "No. It's totally acceptable to have a threat 3 infantry unit roll three blue dice with access to both Tempered Steel/Master Crafted Weapons and Lethal per surge as well as a hit enhancement modifier on their dial. Why should I have to remove a dice for rolling natties? Don't hate the unit, hate the dice bro. . "

Uthuk and Waiqar in unison: "Because it's a threat 3 infantry unit rolling three blue dice with access to both Tempered Steel/Master Crafted Weapons and Lethal per surge as well as a hit enhancement modifier on their dial, which all happens at I4. . .and puts out between 12 to 15 damage a time!"

Latari: "Yeah . . but . . *points at Uthuk player* SPINED THRESHERS!!"

Waiqar: Good point. . they are OP. . they should have their points increased. . "

Uthuk - *dies a little inside*

Daqan - *cries in silence because we don't have a Daqan player*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, damage output is too good to not remove a die.

51 points gives you a 6 tray, with moment of inspiration and tempered steel.  Upper damage is 23 (Hit on dial, rolling 3 hit/surges and a hit/hit on white, spending 1 surge for hit and 2 surges for lethal).

Can anything else do 23 damage for 51 points?  

Edited by Darth Matthew
Forgot hit on the dial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darnati have consistant damage output with any other infantry unit, as long as the die is auto removed. Its handier than it looks. Fishing for dice is better when you know what a potential extra die facing is. Darnati are also very resilient to betrayal, as you remove the most damaging die from the roll.

I'll also restate that if the darnati die removal is only after choosing to reroll, then wraiths become super potent, as their wording then implies they interrupt and reroll everytime your about to reroll for a rank.

The removal is automatic. Only way it could work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darth Matthew said:

IMO, damage output is too good to not remove a die.

51 points gives you a 6 tray, with moment of inspiration and tempered steel.  Upper damage is 23 (Hit on dial, rolling 3 hit/surges and a hit/hit on white, spending 1 surge for hit and 2 surges for lethal).

Can anything else do 23 damage for 51 points?  

To answer your question, a 4 tray unit of Oathsworn Cavalry reformed by Hawthorne, with MOI and TS can throw 32 damage with a perfect roll and only costs 42 points.

I don't know that the best possible scenario is all that important to consider when considering the balance of a unit.  A solo rune golem can potentially throw 12 damage for 17 points, but nobody is making the case that they are overpowered.

This isn't really a balance discussion, it is a rules discussion.  FFG is perfectly capable of making overpowered units (COUGHspinedthreshersCOUGH)...

18 minutes ago, Jukey said:

Darnati have consistant damage output with any other infantry unit, as long as the die is auto removed. Its handier than it looks. Fishing for dice is better when you know what a potential extra die facing is. Darnati are also very resilient to betrayal, as you remove the most damaging die from the roll.

 I'll also restate that if the darnati die removal is only after choosing to reroll, then wraiths become super potent, as their wording then implies they interrupt and reroll everytime your about to reroll for a rank.

The removal is automatic. Only way it could work.

Great points on the value of having 3 dice and having to remove one.  The resilient to betrayal thing is something I hadn't previously considered.

I do think the wraith argument is the best one towards this interpretation of the rule. It's the reason I think they should always remove one die.

All this said:  Is there anyone that ran Darnati in an official tournament where the rule was discussed.  Was there any controversy at all or was it just accepted that the dice is removed every time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×