Alright, you roll 4 dice, should have rolled 5. It doesn't matter what 4 dice those are, the 5th is still the 5th. it effects only it's own result.

Now, If you've rolled 5 dice and should have rolled 4, then which dice do you reduce? Do you remove your best? Your worst? At random? Who chooses. Hence total reroll where necessary.

There is some flawed logic here. When I TO, my rule of thumb is that if you mess up then you are at the mercy of your opponent. Dice have been rolled. If you forget one (the nice thing to do is to let your opponent roll the missed die), too bad. If you roll too many, your opponent chooses which die to cancel. Are these rules nice? Maybe not, but they are just and mathematically fair to the player who has been wronged.

How is it flawed?

Reducing with dice is inherently harder than adding.

This term "fair" keeps being used. Fair is NOT a re-roll. If the original die did not inherently favor the offender, then they should not get another chance to gain more favorable results. Furthermore, consistency is an important part of fair rules. Because allowing re-rolls could lead to a more adventitious result for the offender, re-rolls should never be allowed. The results of the dice are already on the table. If there are too many dice, the opposing player chooses which dice to disavow.

Opposing player choosing the dice to disavow is actually fair and reasonable.

If the dice rolls are wrong/forgotten though, and there is too much mud there to disavow one dice, re-rolls still become required.

Alright, you roll 4 dice, should have rolled 5. It doesn't matter what 4 dice those are, the 5th is still the 5th. it effects only it's own result.

Now, If you've rolled 5 dice and should have rolled 4, then which dice do you reduce? Do you remove your best? Your worst? At random? Who chooses. Hence total reroll where necessary.

There is some flawed logic here. When I TO, my rule of thumb is that if you mess up then you are at the mercy of your opponent. Dice have been rolled. If you forget one (the nice thing to do is to let your opponent roll the missed die), too bad. If you roll too many, your opponent chooses which die to cancel. Are these rules nice? Maybe not, but they are just and mathematically fair to the player who has been wronged.

How is it flawed?

Reducing with dice is inherently harder than adding.

This term "fair" keeps being used. Fair is NOT a re-roll. If the original die did not inherently favor the offender, then they should not get another chance to gain more favorable results. Furthermore, consistency is an important part of fair rules. Because allowing re-rolls could lead to a more adventitious result for the offender, re-rolls should never be allowed. The results of the dice are already on the table. If there are too many dice, the opposing player chooses which dice to disavow.

The initial die roll did not favor either player because it was not a valid roll. It's results are no more relevant than the results of me Idly rolling all six of my attack dice while I wait for my opponent to decide on maneuvers.

Our rule when we play is this:

If you screw up the number of dice to roll, and it's noticed/caught, your opponent decides how to fix it. Whether that's an entire reroll, or removing an extra result, or adding an extra die, it's your opponents choice. Sorta like picking a red move when your stressed

I just find it fascinating, because it creates a double standard.

Now - I've seen some very concise arguments for why it is a logical, or perhaps even justified double standard, don't get me wrong.

But it does handle one distinct situation: "I rolled the incorrect number of dice" in two unique ways, depending on whether that number was too many, or too few.

I guess perhaps I'm simply finding it interesting that more people aren't in favor of one blanket rule for that situation:

If you rolled an incorrect number of dice, discard the result and reroll the proper number.

The rules also expressly permit rolling dice in groups smaller than the total amount that you are entitled to.

As long as the missing dice are noticed before moving on to the next step, there is no reason not to roll them.

Where in the rules does it say you can choose to roll fewer dice than required?

Fewer than required, no, fewer than you need yes.

a TL can be used to reroll 0 dice for example.

edit: A counterexample, where fewer by required is a thing is Han Solo, if he rolls he HAS to reroll all. Can't only roll blanks/focii. - just to explain why I specified the difference.

Fewer than required, no, fewer than you need yes.

a TL can be used to reroll 0 dice for example.

Ok - the way he worded it made it sound like you could choose to roll fewer than required, which would open up all kinds of abuse.

Our rule when we play is this:

If you screw up the number of dice to roll, and it's noticed/caught, your opponent decides how to fix it. Whether that's an entire reroll, or removing an extra result, or adding an extra die, it's your opponents choice. Sorta like picking a red move when your stressed

Difference here is when you reveal an illegal maneuver things have changed from when you picked that maneuver, and it's impossible to go back to dial selection without some information changing. With dice if I roll 5 instead of 4, nothing changes from going back and rolling the correct number.

Alright, you roll 4 dice, should have rolled 5. It doesn't matter what 4 dice those are, the 5th is still the 5th. it effects only it's own result.

Now, If you've rolled 5 dice and should have rolled 4, then which dice do you reduce? Do you remove your best? Your worst? At random? Who chooses. Hence total reroll where necessary.

There is some flawed logic here. When I TO, my rule of thumb is that if you mess up then you are at the mercy of your opponent. Dice have been rolled. If you forget one (the nice thing to do is to let your opponent roll the missed die), too bad. If you roll too many, your opponent chooses which die to cancel. Are these rules nice? Maybe not, but they are just and mathematically fair to the player who has been wronged.

How is it flawed?

Reducing with dice is inherently harder than adding.

This term "fair" keeps being used. Fair is NOT a re-roll. If the original die did not inherently favor the offender, then they should not get another chance to gain more favorable results. Furthermore, consistency is an important part of fair rules. Because allowing re-rolls could lead to a more adventitious result for the offender, re-rolls should never be allowed. The results of the dice are already on the table. If there are too many dice, the opposing player chooses which dice to disavow.

The initial die roll did not favor either player because it was not a valid roll. It's results are no more relevant than the results of me Idly rolling all six of my attack dice while I wait for my opponent to decide on maneuvers.

This game has steps. Actions MUST happen inside of the proper steps. Actions that should or could have been done during a certain step may no longer be done once the game has progressed beyond that step. This is called "Missed Opportunity". Dice that are rolled at the appropriate time are valid. They may not be a legal result, but they still matter (just as an illegal dial does). If only 3 out of those 4 dice should have been rolled, then only ONE of those dice is the offender. The other three were legally rolled and must be counted.

Fewer than required, no, fewer than you need yes.

a TL can be used to reroll 0 dice for example.

Ok - the way he worded it made it sound like you could choose to roll fewer than required, which would open up all kinds of abuse.

Yeah I edited my above post to explain the difference.

I just find it fascinating, because it creates a double standard.

Now - I've seen some very concise arguments for why it is a logical, or perhaps even justified double standard, don't get me wrong.

But it does handle one distinct situation: "I rolled the incorrect number of dice" in two unique ways, depending on whether that number was too many, or too few.

I guess perhaps I'm simply finding it interesting that more people aren't in favor of one blanket rule for that situation:

If you rolled an incorrect number of dice, discard the result and reroll the proper number.

I think it's because each die, if rolled properly, is still random. Yes, throwing four dice instead of three will effect how they fall but I have no control on whether those effects are beneficial. Therefore, rolling them separately won't realistically grant either player an advantage. I've even seen people, when they need to roll straight Evades, throw each green die one at a time (the idea being that if the first one is blank they're dead anyway, after that it's purely for dramatics).

When rolling too many dice, there's that awkward question of which result(s) would never have happened. Some people have said that if all the dice come up the same they'll just ignore one and move on, but I don't generally like this method. Since which die result we remove could have a lot of impact on the game, I tend to prefer simply agreeing that we reroll the correct number and pretend the screwed up roll never happened.

Basically, it's easy to correct rolling too few dice with no hard feelings.

Hrm. I surprised at how many people just say re-roll them al no matter the situation. If I was playing me, I would imagine it going down like this:

Me: They're all evades, so we'll just count it as 3 instead of 4.

Other me: No, I rolled too many, I should re-roll them all.

Me: No, really, it's cool. Count it as 3.

Other Me: No, really, I'll reroll them.

Me: Dude, just take 3.

*fight ensues*

But basically, really, I just make a value judgement. What is the least harsh way to get to the right number of dice? Rolled all the same thing, just keep the right number and move on. Rolled some mixture? Hard to know, let's do the thing that isn't a penalty and reroll them. Conversely, I would let my opponent decide unless I felt they were being unfair, and expect them to treat me the same way.

I'm not saying everyone should be that way, but I'm surprised that there are so many people willing to risk a toxic situation by making someone who rolled all evades reroll all their dice. I'm not saying that guy is entitled to be mad, but I'd rather just not deal with it if he is.

I really don't get this "re-rolls are unfair" philosophy. They're independent events. Rolling too many dice doesn't give you an advantage if it's caught and corrected. It's not "unfair" to your opponent if your correct roll turns out better than your incorrect roll. Re-rolling the correct amount of dice isn't giving you another chance to dodge, because the first roll wasn't a chance at all - unless you decide that the "wronged" opponent has an option to keep it.

If both players agree to handle this situation by selecting dice to cancel, then fine - but you're creating a case in which the random element of the game is arbitrarily less random. Re-rolling the correct amount of dice does not have this effect. It doesn't tip the odds in either player's favor.

What about this situation: you're attacking and your opponent makes their defense roll: Blank, Blank, Crit. Realizing that they picked up their red dice by mistake, they roll again with the correct defense dice: Evade, Evade, Evade. Is this unfair to you? Should they have kept the initial roll? If yes, should the Crit result be counted as a Blank, or should it add to the damage?

The opponent had an advantage (unintentional or not) by rolling too many dice. Therefore, the other player should be able to get an advantage back to have them reroll the right amount or just keep the current results.

There's some serious lack of basic statistics going on in this thread, because a previous result has no effect on a future outcome.

The only fair thing to do in the case of too many dice is a reroll. Allowing one party to decide what result to remove is inherently unfair, because they will always remove the result that suits them best. You are enforcing a penalty on the other player for no good reason.

A reroll is never, ever, ever to the advantage of that player. Ever. There is never anything gained with a complete reroll. Sure it may be better, but it may be worse, either way the avg will remain the same.

It's not something you can abuse because if you do it consistently, then the player doing it is just as likely to lose a good roll as they are a bad one.

Han works differently because you can decide to keep your roll or not. TL is even better because you can choose which dice to reroll.

In the case of too few dice, there is nothing that needs to be fixed, other than rolling enough dice to make up the difference. You can not force someone to reroll in that case, because the rules actually state that you do not have to roll all the dice at the same time.

For consistency's sake, it's best to reroll all if they roll too many. If they roll too few, I'm fine with them adding dice to get to the right total. In that rare corner case where it's obvious that they succeeded on the roll easily (e.g., the 4 evades scenario), then I'll often just accept it. It seems EXTREMELY douchey to try to argue about having more/less dice rolled will affect the outcome and making them reroll them all. That being said, those corner cases are extremely rare in being that obvious, so rerolling them all is the better solution.

Much more frequent is disputes over what is or is not a cocked dice, particularly when only slightly cocked (like on an asteroid marker). Far too many opponents try to let successes lie and reroll failures which is pretty much the definition of cheating.

My test for cocmed dice is seeing if I can balance another die on top. If it stays balanced, the result is valid.

The opponent had an advantage (unintentional or not) by rolling too many dice. Therefore, the other player should be able to get an advantage back to have them reroll the right amount or just keep the current results.

There's some serious lack of basic statistics going on in this thread, because a previous result has no effect on a future outcome.

The only fair thing to do in the case of too many dice is a reroll. Allowing one party to decide what result to remove is inherently unfair, because they will always remove the result that suits them best. You are enforcing a penalty on the other player for no good reason.

It was unfair in the first place that the opponent rolled too many dice. So of course the opponent will decide what suits them the best. Next time be careful what you roll; just like when you select a red maneuver while you're stressed. Your opponent decides what they want to do about it.

Again, this rule has been applied to other games, so I use it here.

The opponent had an advantage (unintentional or not) by rolling too many dice. Therefore, the other player should be able to get an advantage back to have them reroll the right amount or just keep the current results.

There's some serious lack of basic statistics going on in this thread, because a previous result has no effect on a future outcome.

The only fair thing to do in the case of too many dice is a reroll. Allowing one party to decide what result to remove is inherently unfair, because they will always remove the result that suits them best. You are enforcing a penalty on the other player for no good reason.

It was unfair in the first place that the opponent rolled too many dice. So of course the opponent will decide what suits them the best. Next time be careful what you roll; just like when you select a red maneuver while you're stressed. Your opponent decides what they want to do about it.

Again, this rule has been applied to other games, so I use it here.

Explain to me please how it was unfair for the first player to roll 4 dice instead of 3 if none of them count?

You know, I think as long as everyone uses the same dice fettiquete in their gaming group, it works, no matter the variation. For what it's worth, i like remove best and opponents discretion.

It was unfair in the first place that the opponent rolled too many dice.

No it is not. Not if you are consistent in having them reroll. The previous result does not matter so there is no advantage in it. It means nothing so it can not be unfair.

The only thing that is unfair is when you pick and chose the method used, which is inherently unfair to the person rolling the dice. Because doing so will skew the results against them, effectively penalizing them for no reason whatsoever.

you mean penalizing them for throwing the dice they weren't supposed to throw

which is a fair reason to penalize someone during a competitive event where the clock's ticking

which is a fair reason to penalize someone during a competitive event where the clock's ticking

If having to reroll the dice is going to cause an issue in a timed event, then there are larger issues to deal with.

Should they be penalized for rolling dice when they're in the process of setting dials as well? Or perhaps they should get punished for taking time to straighten up their cards while performing actions.

The opponent had an advantage (unintentional or not) by rolling too many dice. Therefore, the other player should be able to get an advantage back to have them reroll the right amount or just keep the current results.

There's some serious lack of basic statistics going on in this thread, because a previous result has no effect on a future outcome.

The only fair thing to do in the case of too many dice is a reroll. Allowing one party to decide what result to remove is inherently unfair, because they will always remove the result that suits them best. You are enforcing a penalty on the other player for no good reason.

It was unfair in the first place that the opponent rolled too many dice. So of course the opponent will decide what suits them the best. Next time be careful what you roll; just like when you select a red maneuver while you're stressed. Your opponent decides what they want to do about it.

Again, this rule has been applied to other games, so I use it here.

No, because the result of the incorrect roll doesn't matter. At. All. I mean, I guess a few second got burned on the clock, but if we're that concerned about a few seconds, there's a lot of behaviors that need to be curtailed in tournaments.

EDIT: This is not the same as inputting a red manuver when you're stressed, because by the time you reveal it, there's additional information available to you that you wouldn't have at the time you chose manuevers. Therefor you can't resolve this fairly. An extra dice being rolled does not affect the rolling of the proper amount of dice later, so there's no reason not to re-roll.

I'm really surprised that this thread is going to 4 pages. I've been playing dice based games for 50+ years and it has always been understood that you reroll if too many dice were thrown. Too few and you throw another. Simple. No lawyer logic, no "it doesn't matter".

Here's a response from a fellow Tournament Director about why that system is used:

The first roll has no impact on the end outcome only if we assume that first over-roll will always be noticed. But in reality, it's sometimes missed. So you want the resolution of this to reduce the incentive for anyone to "accidentally on purpose" over-roll in the hopes of not getting caught.

By giving the other player the choice, you actually streamline play (reduce the amount of rolling that needs to be done) and also provide some incentive to get your dice right the first time.

Some people advocate actually allowing the other player to remove dice to get the right number, which is (usually) even more harsh than asking for the re-roll. In my opinion, though, just allowing the other player the option to re-roll is enough of a penalty that nobody is going to try to sneak extra dice on.

"When rolling too many dice, there's that awkward question of which result(s) would never have happened. Some people have said that if all the dice come up the same they'll just ignore one and move on, but I don't generally like this method. Since which die result we remove could have a lot of impact on the game, I tend to prefer simply agreeing that we reroll the correct number and pretend the screwed up roll never happened."

As Hockeyzombie has stated above.

Our TO only allows this.

If youself rolled too many dice, take away blanks to the correct numer of dice.

If your opponent rolled too many dice, start with the crits to take away.

So easy as that.