Ok, where to start with this.

The results of the first illegal roll, are irrelevant if you can never keep them in whole or in part. There is an equal chance that you are going to erase a positive roll as you will a negative one. What you erase is irrelevant as you have no option not to erase it, and Stat 101 will tell you that events independent of each other don't alter probability.

As I already stated a re-roll is only beneficial to you if you can choose whether or not to make it. Otherwise it in no way alters the probability of the real roll, for better or worse. You thinking that it does is you just not understanding statistics In a basic sense. I will give you an example.

Flipping a coin is a 50/50 proposition. Lets say heads is positive and tails is negative. Now let us say that someone will pay you $100 if over the course of two flips you can get at least one positive result. What are you odds of getting at least one positive result across two flips? The answer is 75% (1- .5 x .5). Now instead you still get two flips, but the first one can't ever count. What are your odds now? The 50/50 of the basic flip of course. That first flip doesn't have any effect on your chances.

That is exactly why a forced re-roll is in no way beneficial and the optional re-rolls in this game are.

There is no need to penalize a player for an error that is so easily corrected, unless it becomes a habit of the player. Doing so is needlessly punitive, specifically because your reason for being punitive is based on your misconceptions of how the probability in this game functions.

Can you in anyway provide any actual reasoning as to how making a roll that won't ever be kept , in whole or in part, is in anyway going to beneficially alter the statistics of the subsequent roll?

The comparisons you are making are not at all relevant. The rulings in regards to how to handle a red maneuver when stressed are in place because you can not, in most circumstances, correct the misplay without benefiting the player that made the misplay. Allowing a player to pick a maneuver outside of the normal phase for doing so is going to allow him to do so with undue information. Forcing a re-roll for the correct number of dice, as I have repeatedly highlighted, is in no way beneficial to the player that made the illegal roll. You only think it is, but you are very much incorrect in that belief.

Again, there is no need to be punitive on the basis of a few players completely unsubstantiated belief that a roll you can't ever keep can ever be beneficial.

I'd love to hear a response from Alex on this matter, even a suggestion or opinion would be nice

I would prefer him to productively spend his time designing the game, instead of reading an incorrect assumption about probability that is based upon confirmation bias.

He's got more important things to do than we have. Let's not waste his time.

But in weird land where logic and stats don't exist, announcing "I'm going to roll this set of dice exactly 100 times and take only the 100th result" guarantees victory.

Now if someone is intentionally rolling too many dice in the attempt to cheat (thinking you won't notice), that's another matter entirely. But I don't think that's the case here.

For those who have some confirmation bias.

Last tournament I was at, my Dash was being shot at by a brobot.

He rolled hit - hit - blank, which he then changed to crit-hit-blank as he was using Mangler.

I announced R3, 3 dice and rolled 3 dice. evade-evade-evade. He, correctly, points out that he used mangler and I should have had no range bonus. I say, whoops, sorry, and we both understand as it was our 8th game of the day and closing in on midnight.

I pick up 2 dice and roll blank-focus. Having used my focus on my attack, I nearly weep as I turn over a direct hit as the second damage card and remove my now dead Dash from the board.

The first result is completely discounted good or bad, therefore it can in no way benefit anyone at any point.

To reinforce what Scotty is saying...

TL's, Lone Wolf and Predator are good because they let you both pick when to reroll and what to reroll. When you have a TL you don't just reroll all your dice, you only roll the ones that have a unwanted result.

That means you never run the risk of losing out on 2 <hits> and a <crit> result, the same goes for Lone Wolf or Pred, because they two give you the choice of when and what to reroll.

The only ability that comes close to this is Han's ability, but even then you're allowed the choice of when to reroll even if you can't control what.

But again this means you can chose to only use his ability when have a below avg roll.

For the sake of argument, lets say someone had to roll twice every time they rolled the dice, and had to throw away the first result. They would end up rolling the avg results, because the first roll never counts. Effectively they're rolling once.

On the other hand, if you can pick when to reroll, your will be rolling above avg because you are only throwing out the bad results, not both the good and bad ones.

With regards to the OP...

Unless an attacker is rolling the exact number of attack dice (equal to his ship’s primary/secondary) weapon value (red number), or the exact number of defense dice (equal to his agility and any other adjustments [i.e. stealth]), the roll is invalid.

The core rules state the attacker/defender "...rolls a number of [attack/defense] dice equal to his ship's [primary weapon/agility] value..."

In other words, if you roll the wrong number of dice, your roll was invalid.

That means that if you were supposed to roll 4 dice, and you only rolled 3 dice - technically, you cannot simply roll a single die to make up the difference, since your die roll was invalid because you did not roll the correct number of dice.

In most friendly games, when mistakes like this happen (even if they happen often) most of us would settle the matter according to our own hospitality (be it stingy or generous). If we were playing more formally - it is perfectly within anyone's right to demand a re-roll if and when an opponent throws an invalid number of dice (meaning, discard all the dice from the invalid roll, and roll the correct amount of dice for the second roll).

That's how I read it at least.

With regards to the OP...

Unless an attacker is rolling the exact number of attack dice (equal to his ship’s primary/secondary) weapon value (red number), or the exact number of defense dice (equal to his agility and any other adjustments [i.e. stealth]), the roll is invalid.

The core rules state the attacker/defender "...rolls a number of [attack/defense] dice equal to his ship's [primary weapon/agility] value..."

In other words, if you roll the wrong number of dice, your roll was invalid.

That means that if you were supposed to roll 4 dice, and you only rolled 3 dice - technically, you cannot simply roll a single die to make up the difference, since your die roll was invalid because you did not roll the correct number of dice.

In most friendly games, when mistakes like this happen (even if they happen often) most of us would settle the matter according to our own hospitality (be it stingy or generous). If we were playing more formally - it is perfectly within anyone's right to demand a re-roll if and when an opponent throws an invalid number of dice (meaning, discard all the dice from the invalid roll, and roll the correct amount of dice for the second roll).

That's how I read it at least.

Actually, if you do not roll enough dice you should be required to roll additional dice until you have the correct number. If I'm supposed to roll 4 dice for my R1 X-Wing attack and only roll 3 dice I certainly should be allowed to roll another die to get me up to 4. If not there is NO WAY to play using only the core set at is only comes with 3 dice of each type. When you don't have enough dice you roll what you have, confirm what you have, and the can roll any dice you still need to get the total number of results you needed.

Yeah the sidebar on page 21 covers this. If you don't roll enough dice you mark the results and roll dice again.

At no point could someone force you to reroll because you rolled to few dice.

Moreover it is inconsequential how you handle that situation as either adding a dice or re-rolling all of the dice has no effect on the odds of that particular roll. Though just adding the correct dice is likely going to save more time.

Actually, if you do not roll enough dice you should be required to roll additional dice until you have the correct number. If I'm supposed to roll 4 dice for my R1 X-Wing attack and only roll 3 dice I certainly should be allowed to roll another die to get me up to 4. If not there is NO WAY to play using only the core set at is only comes with 3 dice of each type. When you don't have enough dice you roll what you have, confirm what you have, and the can roll any dice you still need to get the total number of results you needed.

Yeah the sidebar on page 21 covers this. If you don't roll enough dice you mark the results and roll dice again.

At no point could someone force you to reroll because you rolled to few dice.

Moreover it is inconsequential how you handle that situation as either adding a dice or re-rolling all of the dice has no effect on the odds of that particular roll. Though just adding the correct dice is likely going to save more time.

Agreed: where a player does not possess a sufficient number of dice, and therefore is incapable of rolling all the requisite dice at the same time, that player may mark the dice, and re-use previously rolled dice to finish the roll as outlined on page 21 of the core rules.

That doesn't mean that a player can decide that from now on they are only going to use one die, and simply mark it and re-roll it as per the allowance on page 21. That allowance is for situations where there are insufficient dice - it isn't there to give you the choice of rolling as many as you feel like, then re-rolling the difference. But that is pretty self evident. I mean, I have yet to see anyone bend that allowance to this purpose.

What is being discussed is not someone with insufficient dice, but rather someone who is rolling more dice than they should be. In such a case, they have made an invalid roll, because the rules tell you how many dice are to be rolled, and they rolled more than that number.

I've been around enough to believe that there are (thankfully only a very few) people who are so bent on winning, that they will purposely roll more dice than allowed and feign ignorance or accident if they are called on it, but usually when this sort of thing happens, it is just an honest mistake. It isn't a player's job to decide whether the error was intentional or not - but a player does have a right to expect everyone to play by the same rules, and the rules dictate how many dice are to be thrown. When more dice are thrown than stipulated in the rules - that qualifies as an invalid roll, and a player is within their rights to expect the entire roll to be discarded, and replaced with a new, roll using the correct number of dice.

It would be no different if the player rolled fewer dice than necessary - the roll would be just as invalid, and a player would be within his or her rights to expect a new roll with the correct number of dice.

That may seem overly formal, and in friendly and/or casual games, a lot of players wouldn't bother calling for a re-roll, but in competitive play, that sort of formality is necessary for keeping everyone on the same page.

I will say this: Turning the question around does have some massive consequences unless it is always resolved consistently. If you don't roll enough dice there seem to be two solutions:

1. Roll again using enough dice assuming you have that many dice.

2. Keep what you already have and roll what you need to get enough dice.

Either of these methods should produce the same result but you should NEVER mix the solutions. If I roll too few dice and then notice I'm short if I can just roll the extra dice that is what I will do if what I've already rolled looks good but if what I rolled is bad then I'll just pick them up and add the required die and try again. Here you have two very different outcomes based on when the choice is made.

Here you have two very different outcomes based on when the choice is made.

Very true. If someone doesn't roll enough dice, IMO the only fair thing to do is roll additional dice. Otherwise you can as you point out chose to reroll a bad roll.

Sure you could reroll every time and that would be fair, but personally my SOP would be to just roll enough dice to make up the difference and not touch the existing results.

Moreover it is inconsequential how you handle that situation as either adding a dice or re-rolling all of the dice has no effect on the odds of that particular roll. Though just adding the correct dice is likely going to save more time.

This is completely wrong. How you handle the "rolling too few dice" has MASSIVE consequences unless it is 100% consistent. If you are supposed to roll 4 dice but then roll 3 before adding 1 more is just like rolling 4 dice UNLESS you roll 3 dice and then decide between adding 1 die or rolling 4 dice.

Agreed: where a player does not possess a sufficient number of dice, and therefore is incapable of rolling all the requisite dice at the same time, that player may mark the dice, and re-use previously rolled dice to finish the roll as outlined on page 21 of the core rules.

That doesn't mean that a player can decide that from now on they are only going to use one die, and simply mark it and re-roll it as per the allowance on page 21. That allowance is for situations where there are insufficient dice - it isn't there to give you the choice of rolling as many as you feel like, then re-rolling the difference. But that is pretty self evident. I mean, I have yet to see anyone bend that allowance to this purpose.

What is being discussed is not someone with insufficient dice, but rather someone who is rolling more dice than they should be. In such a case, they have made an invalid roll, because the rules tell you how many dice are to be rolled, and they rolled more than that number.

I've been around enough to believe that there are (thankfully only a very few) people who are so bent on winning, that they will purposely roll more dice than allowed and feign ignorance or accident if they are called on it, but usually when this sort of thing happens, it is just an honest mistake. It isn't a player's job to decide whether the error was intentional or not - but a player does have a right to expect everyone to play by the same rules, and the rules dictate how many dice are to be thrown. When more dice are thrown than stipulated in the rules - that qualifies as an invalid roll, and a player is within their rights to expect the entire roll to be discarded, and replaced with a new, roll using the correct number of dice.

It would be no different if the player rolled fewer dice than necessary - the roll would be just as invalid, and a player would be within his or her rights to expect a new roll with the correct number of dice.

That may seem overly formal, and in friendly and/or casual games, a lot of players wouldn't bother calling for a re-roll, but in competitive play, that sort of formality is necessary for keeping everyone on the same page.

The topic was someone rolling too many dice to start out with but then you brought up rolling too few dice which is not the same discussion. Rolling too few dice is something the game was prepared for and even set up with the Core set where you could see the X-Wing trying an obstructed Range 3 shot at a TIE Fighter before driving in for a clear Range 1 shot the next round. Using the core set you can't help but roll too few dice in those situations so there is the rule to not what you have and roll more to make up the difference. The rule may have been created for "insufficient dice" situations but it also works perfectly well when not enough dice are rolled provided it is applied consistently.

As I have previously mentioned it is the consistency issue that is going to be important when too few dice are rolled and while it may be better if you always make a new roll using the correct number of dice if you don't roll the correct number the first it may not always be possible.

Statistically, there should be no problem with someone rolling one die over and over to get how many they need. In terms of game play doing so would be highly questionable as the die could be loaded, the recorded results could become confused, and finally there is the time issue for tournaments. It would be these other reasons that one die should not be used.

Now back on the original topic I noted is my first posts that playing someone who constantly rolls too many dice is certainly someone to watch. I know mistakes happen and try to see the best in people but you do get people who try to pull a fast one and roll extra dice hoping you'll miss it so they can cheat. I encouraged a three step process to deal with it incase it is an attempt at cheating.

... The rule may have been created for "insufficient dice" situations but it also works perfectly well when not enough dice are rolled provided it is applied consistently.

It seems rather semantic at this point, but it is not the rule that works in that situation, but the mechanic behind the rule that "works" (i.e. that suggests one way to resolve an invalid/improper roll), and if everyone agreed that this was the correct way to resolve invalid/improper rolls, then that'd be that.

Of course that mechanic only work for invalid/improper rolls where (whether by design or accident) too few dice were rolled.

The rules, as written in steps 2 and 4 of the Combat Phase (Page 10) explicitly dictates how many dice are to be rolled when attacking and defending:

2. Roll Attack Dice: The attacker rolls a number of attack dice equal to his ship’s primary weapon value (red number), unless using a secondary weapon (see “Secondary Weapons” on page 19).

.

.

4. Roll Defense Dice: The defender rolls a number of defense dice equal to his ship’s agility value (green number).

Unfortunately (for some) we don't really have the authority to arbitrarily decide whether rolling too few or too many dice constitutes a "usable" roll. The rules state in no uncertain language exactly how many dice should be rolled in both steps of the combat phase, and presumably, any more or less constitutes an invalid roll.

My point was only that in cases where too few or too many dice are rolled, the rules tell us that those rolls are invalid (as opposed to incomplete).

If I were the judge in a situation like that - I would call for a re-roll, and I would use the rules themselves to justify the call. If someone has another way that they think is better - what is the chaff to the wheat?

Nothing I said was incorrect, I just made no mention of consistency. It is truly inconsequential which method players opt to utilize for a given game. Hell one player could do it one way and the other the other, and it wouldn't matter. As you said the only thing that matters is that a player is using the same method each time.

It's the same way it doesn't matter how players deal with a cracked die or a die ending up off the table. How you deal with it doesn't matter, only that you deal with it the same way regardless of the ramifications to the given roll.

All this wall of text over rolling dice?

Seriously?

At what point do you just get on with the game?

All this wall of text over rolling dice?

Seriously?

At what point do you just get on with the game?

This is a rules-forum.

We don't.

the rules tell us that those rolls are invalid (as opposed to incomplete).

Actually they don't. Because the rules can not tell the difference between someone rolling too few dice because they don't have enough vs just forgetting to roll enough.

If you try to run the rules like you are, then it's not possible to play with only a single core set, since you will run into situations where you can not roll enough dice.

It doesn't actually matter how you deal with someone rolling too few dice, as long as you do it consistently. But again, based on your line of thinking of someone only has 3 dice they can't actually play the game since any time they need a 4th die they can never make a valid roll.

While that person could in theory borrow a die from the other player, the rules don't require that and the other player would have every right to refuse.

Sure, the idea of someone only having 3 dice seems fairly unlikely, but the rules have to be written to cover those kinds of situations. So no the rules don't actually work like you said, in fact they can't without actually breaking the game itself.

Ok, where to start with this.

The results of the first illegal roll, are irrelevant if you can never keep them in whole or in part. There is an equal chance that you are going to erase a positive roll as you will a negative one. What you erase is irrelevant as you have no option not to erase it, and Stat 101 will tell you that events independent of each other don't alter probability.

...

Exactly, sounds like the missed opportunity thread with rebel captive. Just go back to where it is feasible, "Hey, you should have rolled 3 dice not 4 lets redo that roll." Should be straight forward.

the rules tell us that those rolls are invalid (as opposed to incomplete).

Actually they don't. Because the rules can not tell the difference between someone rolling too few dice because they don't have enough vs just forgetting to roll enough.

If you try to run the rules like you are, then it's not possible to play with only a single core set, since you will run into situations where you can not roll enough dice.

It doesn't actually matter how you deal with someone rolling too few dice, as long as you do it consistently. But again, based on your line of thinking of someone only has 3 dice they can't actually play the game since any time they need a 4th die they can never make a valid roll.

While that person could in theory borrow a die from the other player, the rules don't require that and the other player would have every right to refuse.

Sure, the idea of someone only having 3 dice seems fairly unlikely, but the rules have to be written to cover those kinds of situations. So no the rules don't actually work like you said, in fact they can't without actually breaking the game itself.

Right, you dont have to do all the rolls all at once with all different dice (So if you forgot to add a dice you can just add it to the roll). All you have to do is do a reroll of X number of dice and add in the previous result. Look at Armada, you dont even have enough dice right out of the box to do a 4 Blue attack. You just reroll one dice, no big deal.

Well I did the reverse tonight in a tournament. Bossk at range 1 of target rolled 4 hits and a crit. I was 'YEAHHHH!' And my opponent was 'woah'. Just as he was about to take his ship off the the field I said 'WAIT!'

After we realised what had happened (1 too many attack die) I gave my opponent the option:

: remove one attack result or

: re roll.

Of course he chose re-roll wnich turned out not as good but I was happy to do. It was my mistake after all.

If I had rolled all blanks then he would have said 'remove one attack result' which again I would have accepted.

BUT

if I had rolled 5 blanks and then insisted on re-rolling because the incorrect number.... that's rubbish.