Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The Hammerhand power in Codex: Inquisition does not carry the special text present in Codex: Grey Knights that allows models to increase their strength value before applying the x2 multiplier from weapons like power fists. Should we assume it works differently and apply the +1 modifier after doubling the model's strength score?

I'd like to hear how you would play it.

The Faq is for the C:GK and therefor doesnt apply to the C:I.

Pretty sure they will faq it to work like the grey knight version but until then. Its really a shame how many rules problems this new codex causes although most of them wouldve been easily avoidable. Lets it look more and more like a lazy copy-paste-job.

Actually, if they had literally just done copy paste from GK, it would have been fine, but they either forgot or purposely didn't put in the explicit exception needed.

RAW, its not applied before multiplicative modifiers, as is the case in C:GK

RAI: either way, "IF" the FAQ if it comes could as easily be a nerf to GK, or be a re do/removal of this stuff when their new codex comes out, so this is how HH works in the future.

or RAI is that they are even capable of botching a CTRL-C CRTL-V job.....


HIWIPLI its the same as in C:GK... because GW is stupid sometimes

The BRB is pretty clear that WH40k agrees with basic algebra: first multiply/divide, then add/subtract..

GK Hammerhand has a specific exception in the codex (not in a FAQ) to do it differently. Inquisition Hammerhand does not have this exception.

Yep. It'd be 'nice' if they'd taken the entire rule-set from the 'Hammerhand' psychic ability, but they very conspicuously did not in this instance, so the normal order of precedence for modifiers should hold true with this case.

The RAW therefore is pretty clear; until such time as an updated FAQ shows up for the 'dex anyway.

 Neorealist wrote:
Yep. It'd be 'nice' if they'd taken the entire rule-set from the 'Hammerhand' psychic ability, but they very conspicuously did not in this instance, so the normal order of precedence for modifiers should hold true with this case.

The RAW therefore is pretty clear; until such time as an updated FAQ shows up for the 'dex anyway.

This is my assessment as well. Either this is an oversight (perfectly plausible given the copy-paste style of the Inquisition 'dex) or indicative of an upcoming change to the way HH works. Regardless, without the specific exception from C:GK given we should use the standard order of modifiers until an FAQ addresses the discrepancy.

That's not to say it isn't stupid that GW continues to produce identically-named rules with subtly but importantly different wording/effects - it bothers me a lot - but hopefully this one can get fixed relatively soon.

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
The BRB is pretty clear that WH40k agrees with basic algebra: first multiply/divide, then add/subtract..

GK Hammerhand has a specific exception in the codex (not in a FAQ) to do it differently. Inquisition Hammerhand does not have this exception.

GK Hammerhand, though, is in a 5e codex, written before the clarification "multiply first, add second" of the 6e brb.
I think not tweaking it in a faq is an oversight from gw, and that it will be likely corrected as in codex =][= if/when we will have a sixth ed. codex gk

 Kerrathyr wrote:
GK Hammerhand, though, is in a 5e codex, written before the clarification "multiply first, add second" of the 6e brb.
I think not tweaking it in a faq is an oversight from gw, and that it will be likely corrected as in codex =][= if/when we will have a sixth ed. codex gk

The GK Codex Specifically tells you to apply the +1 Str for hammerhand before Multiplying the Strength of a Nemisis Demonhammer.

 Kerrathyr wrote:

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
The BRB is pretty clear that WH40k agrees with basic algebra: first multiply/divide, then add/subtract..

GK Hammerhand has a specific exception in the codex (not in a FAQ) to do it differently. Inquisition Hammerhand does not have this exception.

GK Hammerhand, though, is in a 5e codex, written before the clarification "multiply first, add second" of the 6e brb.
I think not tweaking it in a faq is an oversight from gw, and that it will be likely corrected as in codex =][= if/when we will have a sixth ed. codex gk

That wasnt needed before, you just used the rules for mathematics. So HH HAD to have this exception, otherwise it would work in 5th just as it does in codex I now - multiply then add.