New modifier effect: "Substitute roll for specific value" (Fate Dice etc)

[korzxd]

Could be implemented as a profile ability for Save rolls and a weapon ability for the Hit/Wound/Damage roll.

References
Fluxmaster: Altered Reality (Psychic)
Devastator Squad: Armorium Cherub
Valerian: Hero of Lion's Gate
Infernal Master: Glimpse of Eternity (Psychic)
Aeldari: Army Rule
Aeldari: Enhancement - Fate's Messenger
Farseer: Branching Fates (Psychic)
Farseer Skyrunner: Branching Fates (Psychic)
Troupe Master: Cegorach’s Favour
Ûthar the Destined: Ancestral Fortune

[dixhuit]

The problem with this is: which failed roll?

[korzxd]

Any failure & non-critical or a result range for damage, could it not be handled similarly to how you currently execute re-rolls?

If basing it off of the re-roll effect you wouldn't need a limit input field as it would only ever affect one roll. This field could be replaced with Sequencing (or a better name than that) to determine if it's before/after rolls.

You could first pick your application then whether it's before/after rolls then determine which result to override and lastly what that value is meant to be. Below is a rough idea of the menu.

Application

1. Hit
2. Wound
3. Save
4. Damage

Sequencing

1. Before Roll - (This hides the Result to override input field below)
2. After Roll
3. After Re-roll

Result to override

1. Failures & non-critical - (Shown for Hit/Wound)
2. Failures - (Shown for Save)
3. Result range - (Shown for Damage)

Override Value

• Number Field (value is treated as critical depending on the Override requirements effect that you already have)

[korzxd]

Changed title to better reflect what i wrote in the previous comment

[dixhuit]

This looks like it might have legs since you're requiring the user to specify the "Application" up front. This is more restrictive than many of the actual rules but does a decent job of making this a possibility in UC. Top work as usual mate!

References: Fluxmaster and so on...

FFS GW. So all of these seem to transform the roll into a predetermined unmodified number with the exception of Fluxmaster & Ûthar The Destined (who don't specify "unmodified" and don't inherit it from another rule like Fate Dice). So I'm guessing we're also gonna need a select list for the user to specify an unmodified or modified outcome - because "consistency" still isn't in GW's vocabulary.

Questions / thoughts:

1. Having this effect on weapon abilities gives the user more control over which roll they want to apply it to (I'm thinking about profiles with multiple weapons here). Adding this effect to a profile ability would be less useful as we'd have to resort to just the first roll that meets the criteria, regardless of weapon. This is a pain as these are typically datasheet abilities we're mimicking (not weapon abilities) but the alternatives are either not that useful (described above) or way too complicated to develop and/or use.
2. ^^ This (point 1) could be partly helped by having weapon abilities that can be toggled on & off which is something I've been considering for a while (need to make an issue for that! See: Enable weapon abilities to be toggled just like profile abilities & global modifiers #24).
3. Forgetting about profile/weapon scope for a moment, I'm assuming this effect will trigger only once per simulation? If so, we'll need to make that clear to the user.
4. "Sequencing" select list: I would just call this "When" 😄
5. "Result to override": These options appear to be bound to the "Application" choice so there's nothing for the user to select here - it's more a case of UC letting the user know how it's gonna handle it.
6. Override value: "Override requirements" is an effect and the way I see it, this new thing we're discussing is also an effect. As it stands, UC modifiers can only have 1 effect. As such, if the result of this effect creates say an unmodified 6, then it's up to another modifier to potentially use that for another purpose (e.g. devastating wounds). That's how UC modifiers already work so we should get this by default and maintain consistency. Seeee GW? CONSISTENCY.

[korzxd]

Thanks! Sorry for the delayed response it's been a busy weekend.

FFS GW... because "consistency" still isn't GW's vocabulary.

😂 I was thinking the same thing once i started crawling through the different datasheets.

To answer your questions/ thoughts:

1. Yes having this as a profile ability would not be ideal, but then we could adjust the options depending on whether it's a profile or weapon ability:
   * Profile Ability: The Application would be automatically set to Save with no other options and it would treat this ability as a Defender role.
   * Weapon Ability: The Application choices would be Hit, Wound or Damage.

2. I love this idea! It would save having to create multiple weapons for units like the Field Ornance Battery or the more simple interactions Techmarine - Vengeance of the Omnissiah Ability.

3. Yes once per simulation seems the best way to handle it, otherwise i imagine some users will end up doubling up and producing inaccuracies.

4. I had a brain fart on that one 😅, "when" is much better.

5. Yes that makes more sense.

6. Agreed, so by my understanding the interaction would work like this?
   Weapon with 3 abilities

   • Ability 1: This new modifier effect. Application= Wound, When= Before roll, Override value= 5, Roll state= unmodified.
   • Ability 2: Attack Step condition & Override Requirements effect: Wound roll of 5+ (unmodified) : critical wound.
   • Ability 3: Devastating wounds.

If at least 1 Hit from that weapon is successful then during the wound step Ability 1 would change the first instance to be a guaranteed unmodified wound roll of 5 then Ability 2 would override that value and make it Critical which would trigger Devastating Wounds because of Ability 3.

[dixhuit]

1. OK, that's a sensible suggestion though it would still be down to the user to specify that the profile ability had a "Profile role" of "Defender". We'll likely need to show an alert to the tune of "Other applications are available when this effect is used on a weapon ability" otherwise I can see people getting confused and moaning on Discord...
2. Cool. There's another issue for toggle-able weapon abilities now. Let's park this part for now and deal with that separately. Enable weapon abilities to be toggled just like profile abilities & global modifiers #24
3. 👍
4. 👍
5. 👍
6. Yep, you've got it. Though I think you might have meant "unsuccessful" rather than "successful".

[korzxd]

1. Agreed, good shout!
2. I meant it as in one of the Attacks Hit rolls has to be successful to proceed to the Wound step.