I appreciate all the responses!

For cocked dice I've been taught the method is to place another die on the top face and if the die rolls, then reroll the die, if it stays, then its solidly on that result.

Does anyone else use this or another method to check?

Never done this. If I get a cocked die, I point to it and ask my opponent if he wants me to keep it or reroll. Sometimes it's obviously cocked, and sometimes it's almost flat, but I like to give my opponent some input before I pick it back up again.

Your monkey brain evolved to find patterns to spot predators in the jungle and that pattern seeking habit has never gone away.

That's why when things fall over we assume something or someone must have caused it even when we know we are alone.

You wear a certain pairs of socks and your local sports team wins suddenly they are lucky socks.

It's irrational but even when you know its total nonsense the monkey brain gibbers at the back of your mind saying otherwise.

in the jungle

the mighty jungle

the green rolls blanks tonight....

Welcome to the jungle

We got fun and games...

Tangential to the topic, but are there any guidelines for what to do when you, ahem, mistakenly pick up your opponent's dial instead of your own?

My methods are as follows:

1) Rolled too many, total re-roll unless either removing the best or worst die would have no effect on results (i.e. all blanks, all focus, all hits/crits when shields are up).

2) Rolled too few, roll additional dice and add to previous result.

3) Rolled a die off table, re-roll die that was off table.

4) Rolled die on object edge where it is not totally flat, if the result can be clearly determined because the angle is low, let it ride. If there is any reasonable dispute about what the result actually is, re-roll it. This is the fly casual test.

5) Die touched during roll, re-roll the die that was touched.

There's a potential exploit in #2 for the gamey player - if they roll too few and it's a good roll, then they just add a die.

If it's a bad roll they quote the letter of the rules, cancel the roll a reroll the correct number hoping for a better roll.

I've never come across this - in fact I can confidently say that even the most competitive players I've met have been a pleasure to play. But overall I think the rule should be applied consistently across the board.

I am not going to quote Major Juggler's post because it was really long, but I will link to it. As he explained upthread, anything at all other than consistent application of the reroll requirement changes the distribution. The players should not under any circumstances be permitted to forego the reroll, assuming that "reroll illegal rolls" is the standard in use.

That assumes that the intent of a rule is to not give the party that did not make the mistake an advantage. Rules are rules created by people and subject to change. Baseball is 9 innings because the rules state that 9 innings is the length of a game. It could be 10 or 8 or whatever the governing body says it is.

I must assume that the rules do not intend to create an advantage for either player because the rules do not instruct us to advantage either player. I am going to invoke Vanor DM's Goldener Rule: Do what the rule/card says; do not do what the rule/card doesn't say. I am not sure what you are getting at with the baseball analogy since there have never been any rule changes pertaining to mis-rolled dice.

There's a potential exploit in #2 for the gamey player - if they roll too few and it's a good roll, then they just add a die.

If it's a bad roll they quote the letter of the rules, cancel the roll a reroll the correct number hoping for a better roll.

I've never come across this - in fact I can confidently say that even the most competitive players I've met have been a pleasure to play. But overall I think the rule should be applied consistently across the board.

I am repeating myself (and many others) when I say that no method is fair unless it is applied universally. The fact that this thread has continued for nine pages has convinced me that there would be a great deal of value in an official ruling.

I am not going to quote Major Juggler's post because it was really long, but I will link to it. As he explained upthread, anything at all other than consistent application of the reroll requirement changes the distribution. The players should not under any circumstances be permitted to forego the reroll, assuming that "reroll illegal rolls" is the standard in use.

That assumes that the intent of a rule is to not give the party that did not make the mistake an advantage. Rules are rules created by people and subject to change. Baseball is 9 innings because the rules state that 9 innings is the length of a game. It could be 10 or 8 or whatever the governing body says it is.

I must assume that the rules do not intend to create an advantage for either player because the rules do not instruct us to advantage either player. I am going to invoke Vanor DM's Goldener Rule: Do what the rule/card says; do not do what the rule/card doesn't say. I am not sure what you are getting at with the baseball analogy since there have never been any rule changes pertaining to mis-rolled dice.

May I point you to Page 4 of the FAQ Version 3.2.1 under the heading of Mistakes. In each of the examples given, the player not making the mistake has the advantage in in having final say over the result of the mistake fix. This gives precedent that the player not making the mistake is given an advantage in resolving said mistake. I consider rolling the wrong number of dice a mistake.

I believe you are being intentionally dense with the baseball reference. It was only presented to show that rules are only rules because the governing body maintaining said rules say they are. Every "game" rule is arbitrary and subject to change depending on the whim of the governing body.

There's a potential exploit in #2 for the gamey player - if they roll too few and it's a good roll, then they just add a die.

If it's a bad roll they quote the letter of the rules, cancel the roll a reroll the correct number hoping for a better roll.

I've never come across this - in fact I can confidently say that even the most competitive players I've met have been a pleasure to play. But overall I think the rule should be applied consistently across the board.

I am repeating myself (and many others) when I say that no method is fair unless it is applied universally. The fact that this thread has continued for nine pages has convinced me that there would be a great deal of value in an official ruling.

Why? Has this been an issue where you play? Are the players themselves not fixing this issue, without a TO, in most (if not all) games? Why bring in an official ruling (just one more thing to learn) where one is not needed?

This gives precedent that the player not making the mistake is given an advantage in resolving said mistake. I consider rolling the wrong number of dice a mistake.

A couple things...

First the 'wrong number of dice' will depend greatly on if it's too many or too few. If it's too few the rules already cover this and so there's really no need for discussion. Honestly, if a dice goes off the table it's the same thing as rolling too few dice.

The other is that while yes there is a precedent for this, in those cases you have a situation where there is no way to fix the mistake without giving the offending player an advantage.

Letting them set a dial after another ship has already moved gives them information they shouldn't have. Rolling dice however doesn't. So we aren't comparing completely comparable situations. Now I'll admit that I'm reading a bit of RAI into it.

As a FYI, I have yet to hear back from FFG.

I believe you are being intentionally dense with the baseball reference. It was only presented to show that rules are only rules because the governing body maintaining said rules say they are. Every "game" rule is arbitrary and subject to change depending on the whim of the governing body.

Let's not make this personal. As soon as this discussion descends to name-calling and ad hominem, I'm out. Your statement argued (I think) that rules are subject to interpretation (by the players) because rules are subject to change (by the governing body). The one does not follow from the other.

That assumes that the intent of a rule is to not give the party that did not make the mistake an advantage. Rules are rules created by people and subject to change. Baseball is 9 innings because the rules state that 9 innings is the length of a game. It could be 10 or 8 or whatever the governing body says it is.

I must assume that the rules do not intend to create an advantage for either player because the rules do not instruct us to advantage either player. I am going to invoke Vanor DM's Goldener Rule: Do what the rule/card says; do not do what the rule/card doesn't say. I am not sure what you are getting at with the baseball analogy since there have never been any rule changes pertaining to mis-rolled dice.

May I point you to Page 4 of the FAQ Version 3.2.1 under the heading of Mistakes. In each of the examples given, the player not making the mistake has the advantage in in having final say over the result of the mistake fix. This gives precedent that the player not making the mistake is given an advantage in resolving said mistake. I consider rolling the wrong number of dice a mistake.

This section of the FAQ establishes "a clear system" to resolve three specific types of mistakes. It is dangerous to extrapolate these rulings to dissimilar situations; the rules simply do not address a case wherein one player rolls too many dice (I believe my earlier post to be the interpretation that requires the fewest assumptions).

In each of these three cases, the rule can reasonably be interpreted to provide the minimum possible advantage to the non-offending player. Further, all three cases are clarified with the following: "These rules are not intended to punish players." I am left with the understanding that X-wing's rules only enforce a disadvantage upon an offender when failure to do so would, in fact, provide an advantage form making the mistake.

There's a potential exploit in #2 for the gamey player - if they roll too few and it's a good roll, then they just add a die.

If it's a bad roll they quote the letter of the rules, cancel the roll a reroll the correct number hoping for a better roll.

I've never come across this - in fact I can confidently say that even the most competitive players I've met have been a pleasure to play. But overall I think the rule should be applied consistently across the board.

I am repeating myself (and many others) when I say that no method is fair unless it is applied universally. The fact that this thread has continued for nine pages has convinced me that there would be a great deal of value in an official ruling.

Why? Has this been an issue where you play? Are the players themselves not fixing this issue, without a TO, in most (if not all) games? Why bring in an official ruling (just one more thing to learn) where one is not needed?

It really hasn't, but what would happen if you or I were to meet at a tournament with an inexperienced TO? We both obviously feel pretty strongly about our respective interpretations. Aside from Funkleton's hypothetical unscrupulous player, a universal ruling would prevent a good-faith argument in favor of one's preferred method from looking like an attempt to gain an advantage.

I believe you are being intentionally dense with the baseball reference. It was only presented to show that rules are only rules because the governing body maintaining said rules say they are. Every "game" rule is arbitrary and subject to change depending on the whim of the governing body.

Let's not make this personal. As soon as this discussion descends to name-calling and ad hominem, I'm out. Your statement argued (I think) that rules are subject to interpretation (by the players) because rules are subject to change (by the governing body). The one does not follow from the other.

That assumes that the intent of a rule is to not give the party that did not make the mistake an advantage. Rules are rules created by people and subject to change. Baseball is 9 innings because the rules state that 9 innings is the length of a game. It could be 10 or 8 or whatever the governing body says it is.

I must assume that the rules do not intend to create an advantage for either player because the rules do not instruct us to advantage either player. I am going to invoke Vanor DM's Goldener Rule: Do what the rule/card says; do not do what the rule/card doesn't say. I am not sure what you are getting at with the baseball analogy since there have never been any rule changes pertaining to mis-rolled dice.

May I point you to Page 4 of the FAQ Version 3.2.1 under the heading of Mistakes. In each of the examples given, the player not making the mistake has the advantage in in having final say over the result of the mistake fix. This gives precedent that the player not making the mistake is given an advantage in resolving said mistake. I consider rolling the wrong number of dice a mistake.

This section of the FAQ establishes "a clear system" to resolve three specific types of mistakes. It is dangerous to extrapolate these rulings to dissimilar situations; the rules simply do not address a case wherein one player rolls too many dice (I believe my earlier post to be the interpretation that requires the fewest assumptions).

In each of these three cases, the rule can reasonably be interpreted to provide the minimum possible advantage to the non-offending player. Further, all three cases are clarified with the following: "These rules are not intended to punish players." I am left with the understanding that X-wing's rules only enforce a disadvantage upon an offender when failure to do so would, in fact, provide an advantage form making the mistake.

I apologize for any offense taken. I just hope that you see my point. I think we can just agree to disagree on the slight disagreement we have. I don't think we are too far off. I enjoy philosophical debates with articulate people.

I just hope that you see my point.

If your point is that the rules are subject to change. I would agree. FFG has shown a number of times they'll make the rules do what they want, even if the rules don't work that way.

There is IMO anyway no clear set rule about what to do if someone rolls too many dice. Myself I'd like to see one so there is a consistent method of dealing with it.

I believe that the better method is to reroll because there's no advantage in doing so, which isn't true of the other examples like forgetting to set a dial.

One thing I'm surprised I haven't seen come up yet- Bowling for dice. People who roll one die at a time and try too knock die with results they don't like. I've seen people do it in various games. As other have said, those who roll too many and hope you don't notice. There are also the folks who announce a result and scoop up the dice before you can see them.

In casual play-

Roll everything at once if possible. If not note the results and continue to roll.

If you roll too few, note the results and roll the rest of the dice.

If you roll too many, reroll.

However in tournament play you need to be more strict I think.

Roll everything at once.

If you roll too few, that's your roll.

If you roll too many, your opponent chooses if you reroll or not.

If you pick up your dice before your opponent verifies, reroll with one less die. (These players tend to be especially quick to pick up when its a bad roll)

A lot of dice cheating is really hard to tell apart from an innocent mistake, but in a competitive setting I feel like the only way to prevent its is treat any 'mistake' in a way that it can't possibly be an advantage.

I am not going to quote Major Juggler's post because it was really long, but I will link to it. As he explained upthread, anything at all other than consistent application of the reroll requirement changes the distribution. The players should not under any circumstances be permitted to forego the reroll, assuming that "reroll illegal rolls" is the standard in use.

That assumes that the intent of a rule is to not give the party that did not make the mistake an advantage. Rules are rules created by people and subject to change. Baseball is 9 innings because the rules state that 9 innings is the length of a game. It could be 10 or 8 or whatever the governing body says it is.

I must assume that the rules do not intend to create an advantage for either player because the rules do not instruct us to advantage either player. I am going to invoke Vanor DM's Goldener Rule: Do what the rule/card says; do not do what the rule/card doesn't say. I am not sure what you are getting at with the baseball analogy since there have never been any rule changes pertaining to mis-rolled dice.

May I point you to Page 4 of the FAQ Version 3.2.1 under the heading of Mistakes. In each of the examples given, the player not making the mistake has the advantage in in having final say over the result of the mistake fix. This gives precedent that the player not making the mistake is given an advantage in resolving said mistake. I consider rolling the wrong number of dice a mistake.

I believe you are being intentionally dense with the baseball reference. It was only presented to show that rules are only rules because the governing body maintaining said rules say they are. Every "game" rule is arbitrary and subject to change depending on the whim of the governing body.

Taken from said page of the faq...

Mistakes

Mistakes happen. At competitive and premier events, it is important to have a clear system in place to resolve mistakes when they arise.

• If a player assigns the wrong ship dial to his ship (for example, assigning a B-wing dial to an X-wing), when he reveals the dial he must inform his opponent of the error. If the revealed maneuver is a legal maneuver for that ship (for example, the revealed B-wing dial shows a green [ 1] maneuver, a maneuver that also appears on the X-wing ship dial), it is executed as normal. If the revealed maneuver is not a legal maneuver for that ship (For example the B-wing dial shows a red [ 2] maneuver, a maneuver that does not appear on the X-wing ship dial), the player’s opponent chooses which legal maneuver from that ship’s actual dial that ship will perform.

• If a player reveals a dial that is stuck between two different maneuvers in such a way that it is impossible to determine which maneuver was selected, the player’s opponent chooses which of those two maneuvers that ship will perform.

• If a player knocks a ship over, he must endeavour to replace it exactly as he found it. If there is any disagreement about its placement, the player’s opponent has final say over its position, though he must attempt to match the ship’s original position.

These rules are not intended to punish players, or encourage players to rush through timing windows in order to deny their opponent an opportunity. Players must allow their opponents ample time to perform actions, execute maneuvers, and declare game effects

It has already been argued that all of these rules attempt to resolve in the most neutral nonpunishing way possible and do not benefit either player unless it is not possible to do so. If not possible to do that it then resolves with the opponents choice because that is fair (a mistake should not give you an advantage). There is a clear way to do this and not supply any advantage or disadvatage with dice and that is just rerolling. I also bolded and enlarge specific text saying "These rules are not intended to punish players" straight from the faq so it seems FFG does not agree that people should be punished for mistakes.

so based on that, the only way to deal with too many rolled dice, is to reroll all of them... anything else gives the opponent an advantage which punishes the person making the mistake.

(the first roll is not counted, so no advantage or disadvantage is given to either player)

If you start letting the opponent pick what to do they gain advanatages, which punish the player that rolled too many dice by mistake...

- opponent picks what to do (reroll or dicard)... opponent picks based on if the roll was good or bad for them... that is an advantage.

- opponent picks what dice to discard... that is an advantage.

I would also like to note that if you go with reroll unless all results are the same you are creating an "if" clause in a rule that isn't needed. Ever hear the old saying "keep it simple stupid" Too many dice rolled = 1st roll is not valid, reroll proper number of dice for valid results. Nice and simple.

As far as too few dice, FFG didn't supply enough dice to roll all dice in all situations, so they already have a fair rule that covers that... roll the extra dice needed to end up with a valid result. No advantage given either way in doing that

and no that is not inconsistant... too few dice rolled, and too many dice rolled can and should be dealt with two differant rules so as to deal with the mistakes in the most fair way possiable...

Cheating (bowling for dice, grabbing dice before the other player can compare etc) is cheating... that is a totally seperate issue.

I am not going to quote Major Juggler's post because it was really long, but I will link to it. As he explained upthread, anything at all other than consistent application of the reroll requirement changes the distribution. The players should not under any circumstances be permitted to forego the reroll, assuming that "reroll illegal rolls" is the standard in use.

That assumes that the intent of a rule is to not give the party that did not make the mistake an advantage. Rules are rules created by people and subject to change. Baseball is 9 innings because the rules state that 9 innings is the length of a game. It could be 10 or 8 or whatever the governing body says it is.

I must assume that the rules do not intend to create an advantage for either player because the rules do not instruct us to advantage either player. I am going to invoke Vanor DM's Goldener Rule: Do what the rule/card says; do not do what the rule/card doesn't say. I am not sure what you are getting at with the baseball analogy since there have never been any rule changes pertaining to mis-rolled dice.

May I point you to Page 4 of the FAQ Version 3.2.1 under the heading of Mistakes. In each of the examples given, the player not making the mistake has the advantage in in having final say over the result of the mistake fix. This gives precedent that the player not making the mistake is given an advantage in resolving said mistake. I consider rolling the wrong number of dice a mistake.

I believe you are being intentionally dense with the baseball reference. It was only presented to show that rules are only rules because the governing body maintaining said rules say they are. Every "game" rule is arbitrary and subject to change depending on the whim of the governing body.

Not exactly. The following establishes that you can resolve mistakes without giving an advantage to either player.

• If a player assigns the wrong ship dial to his ship (for example, assigning a B-wing dial to an X-wing), when he reveals the dial he must inform his opponent of the error. If the revealed maneuver is a legal maneuver for that ship (for example, the revealed B-wing dial shows a green [ 1] maneuver, a maneuver that also appears on the X-wing ship dial), it is executed as normal. If the revealed maneuver is not a legal maneuver for that ship (For example the B-wing dial shows a red [ 2] maneuver, a maneuver that does not appear on the X-wing ship dial), the player’s opponent chooses which legal maneuver from that ship’s actual dial that ship will perform.

Only when there is not an option to fix the mistake without an advantage does the rule allow the opponent to make a choice that would give them an advantage.

Rerolling dice is a solution that can be done without giving either player an advantage and fixes the mistake.

10 pages?

I am not going to quote Major Juggler's post because it was really long, but I will link to it. As he explained upthread, anything at all other than consistent application of the reroll requirement changes the distribution. The players should not under any circumstances be permitted to forego the reroll, assuming that "reroll illegal rolls" is the standard in use.

That assumes that the intent of a rule is to not give the party that did not make the mistake an advantage. Rules are rules created by people and subject to change. Baseball is 9 innings because the rules state that 9 innings is the length of a game. It could be 10 or 8 or whatever the governing body says it is.

I must assume that the rules do not intend to create an advantage for either player because the rules do not instruct us to advantage either player. I am going to invoke Vanor DM's Goldener Rule: Do what the rule/card says; do not do what the rule/card doesn't say. I am not sure what you are getting at with the baseball analogy since there have never been any rule changes pertaining to mis-rolled dice.

May I point you to Page 4 of the FAQ Version 3.2.1 under the heading of Mistakes. In each of the examples given, the player not making the mistake has the advantage in in having final say over the result of the mistake fix. This gives precedent that the player not making the mistake is given an advantage in resolving said mistake. I consider rolling the wrong number of dice a mistake.

I believe you are being intentionally dense with the baseball reference. It was only presented to show that rules are only rules because the governing body maintaining said rules say they are. Every "game" rule is arbitrary and subject to change depending on the whim of the governing body.

Not exactly. The following establishes that you can resolve mistakes without giving an advantage to either player.

• If a player assigns the wrong ship dial to his ship (for example, assigning a B-wing dial to an X-wing), when he reveals the dial he must inform his opponent of the error. If the revealed maneuver is a legal maneuver for that ship (for example, the revealed B-wing dial shows a green [ 1] maneuver, a maneuver that also appears on the X-wing ship dial), it is executed as normal. If the revealed maneuver is not a legal maneuver for that ship (For example the B-wing dial shows a red [ 2] maneuver, a maneuver that does not appear on the X-wing ship dial), the player’s opponent chooses which legal maneuver from that ship’s actual dial that ship will perform.

Only when there is not an option to fix the mistake without an advantage does the rule allow the opponent to make a choice that would give them an advantage.

Rerolling dice is a solution that can be done without giving either player an advantage and fixes the mistake.

And this is exactly why it makes no sense for a TO to take a punitive stance on the matter. The rules do not mandate it, and as noted specifically look for way to avoid being punitive in even more easily abused and less correctable errors.