The odds of passing/failing are exactly the same on the second roll because the first is totally discounted. Your logic is faulty.
The odds of passing/failing are exactly the same on the second roll because the first is totally discounted. Your logic is faulty.I don't know. Statistically, whichever rule applies, you should re-roll. You pass, go swarmlord. You fail, go eldar whatchamafrigger. The odds of failing two 4+ saves is 25%. The odds of failing a 2+ roll twice are not the same as failing a 4+ twice. It is 10%. Or at least a big bottle of sake is making a strong argument in favor of this.
Think about it this way. Guy has a 6+ cover save and makes it. The odds of guy making it again are pretty slim. So, guy should re-roll. Since you ever only get one re-roll as of the Big Bloody Rule Book, the one that should apply is the one that's rules counts. Both rules should be applied depending on the outcome. That is what they are designed for. They are rules for different areas. If you pass, Swarmlord. If you fail, Eldar. They don't cancel. They can both apply, but only when their rule is invoked. Since you only ever get one re-roll, only one rule can be invoked per incident.
Now to be shouted down....![]()
What you fail to grasp is that ALL cases of the first roll are re-rolled making it a 100% probability of being re-rolled. So you're multiplying by 1 essentially.In regards to the discussion, the first part of the link applies. The one detailing the probability of consecutive tosses coming up the same. The first time you flip a coin, it is fifty-fifty. The second time you flip that coin, the odds of it coming up the same side are twenty-five percent. That is because the flips are linked, as it is in this case as well.
They are linked due to whichever power is invoked by the roll. You are always re-rolling and your chances of rolling 4+ is always 50%, but your chances of doing so twice in a row is 25%. Therefore, in a case where you are trying to repeat the first roll, one way or the other, the first roll is not insignificant.
NO it does NOT. Your assumption is based upon the second roll being dependent on the value of the first, which it does not. If there were just one rule affecting the initial roll (Fortune, Swarmlord, Astorath, Fateweaver, etc...) then your assertion would be correct. Having two opposite rules working for the initial roll (canceling themselves out) renders the initial result moot. The initial probability is %100 for a re-roll so it has no bearing whatsoever on the probability of the second roll.It doesn't prevent a six from happening again. It changes the probability of the six occurring again. Honestly,
Oh, I understand the math and what it actually is saying in your link. The whole idea of Pascal's Pyramid is based upon each coin flip being dependent on the others. It is showing the probability of getting a certain amount of heads in a row.unless you understand the math, it probably won't make much sense. I provided a link that provided a pretty decent explanation of the math a bunch of pages ago.