Automatic-hits verses modified-to hit-roll clarification

Confirmation from Games Workshop.

If something automatically hits then any modifier that changes the to-hit roll doesn’t have an effect.

Case in point. The Dreadlance with auto hits works normally in a challenge with anything that would cause it to only hit on ‘6’s.

Jim called gamesworkshop, they told him that you roll for each hit to see if you need a 6, or you auto hit. Interesting that you got a different answer.

I will call tomorrow and see what they tell me.

I called them, they said you dice off each turn to see if the ability works, slight variant on what Jim was told, but far better than ignoring someones special ability in favor of someone elses. Very interesting that you got a completely different answer than the 2 of us Bob.

Do what Steve suggests: Call them 5 times over the course of an hour and 40 minutes, timing each call so it is 20 minutes apart to get a different person every time. Ask the question the same way and keep a tally of the answers, whichever reading the majority agree on, go with it.

Auto Hits trumps Annoyance.

please list a source Marc, just stating it doesn't make it so. When I asked gamesworkshop, I listed several examples. The Brets have a lance that auto hits, VC have an item that allows them to hit on 2+, there is a spell that states you always hit on 2+. The game is about balance, not about favoritism. Another example that is better defined is always goes first. At least here GW had the smarts to explain it better and list what happens if both players have it. The call I made and Jim made backed the rules, a basic rule that has always existed as long as the game has is, " when in doubt, roll a d6, even/odd". If you want to start playing loophole fantasy battle, there is not a perfect game out there.

I'll have to find it but there was a clear FAQ with the Bretonnian Silver Lance of the Blessed vs Annoyance.. stay tuned..

I read that, it was from 2005, we have a new set of rules since then. Even in that forum, they couldn't agree, half said dice, the other half said it should always work. One idea had appeal, which was who's ever turn it was, their item worked. The best idea I have heard was Jim's, which is to divide the attacks by 2 if it could be evenly divided and each item works as stated half the time. If it is an odd number of attacks, dice off for the odd one. In the case against the VC lord, he had 6 attacks, so 3 would auto-hit, 3 would hit on 6's. Hitting on 6's is cheesey, but I don't think it is as cheesey as auto-hiyting 6 times and for every wound you get a chance to wound again giving the VC lord a chance to inflict 12 str 7 wounds on the charge. without ever having to roll to hit. The Brets silver lance is powerful, but it cannot be combined with another item to cause that kind of devastation in one round of combat.

Crobar wrote:

Very interesting that you got a completely different answer than the 2 of us Bob.

Very interesting indeed since I was the only one who wanted to call in the first place.

My call list goes;
4/11 (as it is written)
4/16 (single d6 roll for which power works each combat)
4/17 (as it is written)

Which has me beleive that either there is an unknown errata out there or this is a fairness issue. Not playing by the strict writing of the rules is fine. Actually in the front section GW has the golden rule so there is a precedent.

So for fantasy we can lean on that. I think it would be very important that depending on the group or people they agree on the leaning of the game.

Well at least we're seeing action on the Fantasy boards!!

Quote :

The best idea I have heard was Jim's, which is to divide the attacks by 2 if it could be evenly divided and each item works as stated half the time.

Seems like a nice CAG House Rule to me friend.

ok here is how something simlar works(the grey knights and the collar on the hounds) you dice off and on a (dont remeber was like a 4+) the colar doent work but on a (again dont remeber) or less it works, that is how the normaly handle such things(ran across it a bit back on the faqs)

I remember coming across something like this before. Under a heading of immovable vs. unstoppable. The folks at VT played it as if it is auto hit it's an auto hit and cancels out the needing 6's to hit. The auto is infinite the needing 6's is finite...

makari wrote:

The folks at VT played it as if it is auto hit it's an auto hit and cancels out the needing 6's to hit. The auto is infinite the needing 6's is finite...

... ... ...thats deep

It's pretty clear that GW isn't going to solve this for us in any convient way. If there isn't an errata for the Wood Elves I don't imagine one for the Vampire Counts any time soon.

So either as a big group or smaller groups we'll just have to remember to set solutions at the time.

It wouldn't hurt for people to bring up any other iffy items, special rules, or curioes before a game. That is if they can think of them.

Truthfully I do like the idea of injecting fairness into the game, even though it works agasint me here. It is just I imagine being rules-lawyered when the case returns to a time I need some fairness myself.

The dice off idea doesn't totally repulse me. Only that the 6s-to-hit is a 25 point Spite while the Dreadlance is 60 point Magic Weapon.

look at it this way the lanc bob is talking about costs about 2.5 times as much as the spite dave was useing, it makes perfect since that the lance would out do the spite due to shear point cost if nothing else, also the point of you need 6's(but the auto hitting basicly means you automaticly get the rolls you need so you are rolling the 6's you need automaticly) thats how I would take that, there are very few weapons they cant get around the needing 6's rule and like most things to even that out there needs to be a way(all of which cost more than the spite) so in the end the auto hit even itself out due to the points it costs to have and use

you can't go by cost. If you look at the common magic item list for the last 4 codex's, you will find that costs on things differ. The item does not change, the cost for it does. It is about balance. If someone pays for a magic item, they expect to be able to use it. The fantasy rules have the dice off option for a reason. Mainly because there are holes and the rules are there for guidelines so the the game can be fun and fair for all. The last thing I want is to get stuck in a debate about who's more powerful. I thought what GW said was reasonable and it sounds like several people agreed. I am 4/4 of getting the same answer when I called, maybe the phrasing is the only reason I can think of that Bob is getting a different answer.
My phrasing was simple, when you have items in a challange that conflict, one being an item that says you are hit only on 6's and they opponent has an item that allows either auto-hit or hit on another number, how do you resolve it? I gave examples of the vampire lance and the silver lance auto hitting, the VC have an item that always hits on 2+, The flaming sword of rhuin spell always hits on 2+. All 4 times the answer was the same, roll off each turn to see which item works that turn. Jim's version still meets the intent of their ruling, just takes the randomness out of it. If you want to make up your own rules, that is fine too, but then you get into a lot of problems with people cheating and claiming that that is the way it has always been done here.
What it comes down to is either follow the rules or not, if you follow the flow chart on their website, we come back to the same thing which is to dice off for it. At the same time, don't let the rules be the nexus of your game.
In a recent game, my opponent failed to move his character out of charge range. He thought he had, but he was wrong. I declared a charge on the character, his answer was to pick up the figure and move it out of my charge. It upset me, but I did not stop the game because it felt like they were cheating, I adjusted my play and moved on.
The game needs to be about fairplay. Saying one item works and another doesn't because it cost less just isn't right.

and yet by saying a roll off causes more problems also it is still a added rule(since gw does not have a faq to answer this the answers are not truely correct intill it comes out) that the players agree on, and I disagree something like this needs to be settled(the that player who you played aganist shouldnt have done that plain and simple, that is simple grounds for being kicked out of any type of game even a friendly one). The thing is even in tournamnets you can get differnt ruleings than what the people on the phone say so in the end it truley doesnt matter, and yes you can go off points the common magic iteams is just a bad example thats more to help fill in gaps of a players equipment that they might be lacking or simply for fluff reasons, so in the end this as in some cases is a rule I would say is basicly based on the players playing the game with both sides haveing to agree upon it intill the event of them comeing out with a faq that answers this question.

Guys

space

your stuff

like this.

Seeing one big paragraph hurts the eyes and the soul.