|
Post by ross on Sept 12, 2009 1:42:36 GMT -5
The question is an age old one that i thought I knew the answer to but has resurfaced while reading some forums. With the rune of forging, can you re-roll a misfire for both the shot and the bounce rolls in one turn? I thought the answer was no, but on this forum in Bugmans brewery they eventually ruled that you can www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/14155-the-ultimate-7th-ed-warhammer-dwarf-qa-upd-04oct06/page__st__100Their logic is sound and the writing in the book does not say you can't but i can see where the arguments come from on both sides. (classic GW vagueness) I'm curious as to the opinions of others and if there is another forum or Q&A out there that anyone knows that answers this?
|
|
|
Post by phoenix on Sept 15, 2009 10:01:28 GMT -5
I think I counted three incorrect things in that bugman's thread immediately... ye gods, the terrible rules misinterpretations....
The rule is "either...or" which is clear that it is a choice between the shot or the bounce (not both). If the rule allowed for both, it would be written "the shot and/or the bounce roll".
Now, I find a second question to be more interesting... do you have to choose whether or not to reroll the shot before finding out what will happen with the bounce roll? i.e. if the bounce roll is a misfire, can you then reroll the shot to try to get lucky and hit something with the shot?
|
|
|
Post by ross on Sept 15, 2009 17:22:26 GMT -5
The either or does refer to the shot or the bounce but not the rerolls. it says you reroll misfires and then the either/or is there to further specify that it refers to the shots and the bounces . That is the argument of the thread either/or is not always exclusive. Another thing is how they usually would right it (how I've seen it written in other books) is they say "either/or" and then "but not both" although we shouldn't speculate how they would have written it because these books are filled with grammatical errors and who knows how those Brits would actually write anything?
Thanks a lot for the input, this kind of discussion is exactly what i was shooting for.
|
|