Fragile wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Unless anyone comes up with an exact quote from the BRB that says that psychic powers are special rules, every single point you try to make is a waste of time.

So every model in the game can use psychic powers ?

Every model that is a Psyker.

Fragile wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Unless anyone comes up with an exact quote from the BRB that says that psychic powers are special rules, every single point you try to make is a waste of time.

So every model in the game can use psychic powers ?

Read the posts. You don't know what "special rules" means. "Special Rules" does NOT mean that it's a special rule if you use "special" as an everyday term. Special rules in Warhammer 40k are explicitely given by the BRB itself as pointed out in my previous posts.

Please refer to the tennets of YMDC:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

Especially this:

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

Why don't you follow those tenets yourself? Try this for what is actually said about the special rules:

"Most of the more commonly used special rules in Warhammer 40,000 are listed here, but this is by no means an exhaustive list."

So this is an outright lie:

Special rules in Warhammer 40k are explicitely given by the BRB itself as pointed out in my previous posts.

Are we to believe your lies or shall we read the rulebook instead?

I believe I am done with this thread. Pro-stacking side has failed to provide a written rule that would allow Hammerhead stacking with Hammerhead.

Naw's actually right this time, Special Rules are also found in Codices under the Special Rules section of the various units. Of course, Hammerhand isn't in those either, it's in the Psychic Power section because, wait for it... It's not a special rule but a psychic power.

And once again the pro-stacking side continues to allow my proof that Hammerhand stacks to stand uncontested.
As I'm the person with a sound argument that has yet to be disproven, by the rules of logic and arguments that means I'm winning, correct?

Yes, exactly, hurrah to you.

Then I believe it's time to do my "I won the thread" dance.
But first, I need to choreograph an "I won the thread" dance...

Naw wrote:
Why don't you follow those tenets yourself? Try this for what is actually said about the special rules:

"Most of the more commonly used special rules in Warhammer 40,000 are listed here, but this is by no means an exhaustive list."

So this is an outright lie:

Special rules in Warhammer 40k are explicitely given by the BRB itself as pointed out in my previous posts.

Are we to believe your lies or shall we read the rulebook instead?

I believe I am done with this thread. Pro-stacking side has failed to provide a written rule that would allow Hammerhead stacking with Hammerhead.

If you want to discuss in YMDC, either be familiar with the rules or don't post here at all, please. At the very least, I do expect people to use a very basic understanding of written text. Maybe, if I post it a 3rd time, you might be able to read the entire post and understand it?

 Sigvatr wrote:
Hmmmm I just re-read the part on psychic powers and stacking and I guess I know where the "con-stacking" side has a misunderstanding. Quoting for future reference:

Now - what are "special rules"? The rulebook says that...

Similarly a model might get special rules as the result of psychic powers,scenario special rules or being hunkered down in a particular type of terrain.

...and this might make people think that psychic powers are special rules. But the rulebook explicitely tells us what "special rules" are:

For ease of consultation, we've presented the special rules in alphabetical order.

...just in front of the list that contains all basic "special rules". At the same time, it says that those aren't all "special rules":

Many troops have their own unique abilities, which are laid out in their codex.

...but then says where to find them.

...until then, I'm going to dance. A lot.

Hooray for ANOTHER YMDC thread that lasted 11 pages whereas the correct answer was given on the very first page in the very first reply. Ugh.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Lets humour you all by discounting the special rule argument and focus on the Rules listed on pages 66-69. Lets take it step by step assuming no permission unless stated as per a permissive rule set yes? The assumption being that the Psyker USR grants permission to use these rules and these rules (on Pages66-69) grant permissions for the use of Powers using the rules listed.

The model is a psyker (as per the Psyker USR) so it has permission to have X amount of powers, use said powers with X amount of Warp charges and may only use its powers once per turn Following the rules for Manifesting a Psychic Power.

With this we intrinsically know and multiple of a power must come from two or more psykers. But at this point we have no permission for any power to be cumulative with itself or with a Different power.

Now when we look at the general rules for powers under Resolve Psychic Power it states that: Unless otherwise stayed, the effects of multiple different psychic powers are cumulative. This gives us permission for different powers to be cumulative, different being different named powers and not different castings of the same power. As we know full well a single psyker cannot manifest the same power twice in one turn. So Different must be different powers and not different casters/psykers/sources.

This is the only permission we have regarding multiple powers, only for different powers to be cumulative. We have no permission for powers that are the same, outside of their own text giving specific permission, to be cumulative with themselves.

You mean apart from these rules I've already clearly laid out?

1. It is the assault phase after assault moves but before blows are struck, my Psyker has a warp charge available and has not used used Hammerhand this turn, so I have permission to manifest Hammerhand. - "This power is used during the Assault phase in either's player turn, after assault moves have been made, but before any blows are struck."

2. I have permission to follow the usual steps for manifesting a psychic power in pages 67=68 as my Librarian is a Psyker.

3. I have permission to resolve the power according to instructions in its entry. - "Assuming that the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not nullify it through a successful Deny the \Witch roll, you can now resolve the psychic power according to instructions in its entry."

4. The Hammerhand entry instructs me to apply +1 Strength to the unit, so I do. - "If the psychic test is passed, all models in the unit (including independent characters) have +1 Strength until the end of the Assault phase."

5. The unit already has had Hammerhand cast on it, so I have 2 +1 Strength modifiers, following the rules for multiple modifiers, Each model's current strength is now +2. - "If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values."

Which step is denied by which rule?

If you read my post you may have drawn the conclusion yourself. There is no denial, however there is no Permission to Accumulate Hammerhand with Hammerhand. Here's the short version for you:

+ Permissive rule set
+ Permission only granted for different powers to accumulate
+ No permission for same powers to accumulate (unless specified in their entry)

No Permission = cannot do it

Remember: "Different" must mean different powers because It cannot mean different castings. As same castings cannot exist because a Psyker can only attempt to manifest a power once per turn.

 Bausk wrote:
If you read my post you may have drawn the conclusion yourself. There is no denial, however there is no Permission to Accumulate Hammerhand with Hammerhand. Here's the short version for you:

There actually is, as dual castyings of Hammerhand result in multiple modifiers. As per P.2 Multiple Modifiers are cumulative as P.2 tells us to use standard math.

+ Permissive rule set

Yes, and luckily we have permission to add multiple modifiers cumulatively.

+ Permission only granted for different powers to accumulate

Fixed that for you. (Emphasis mine)

+ No permission for same powers to accumulate (unless specified in their entry)

Incorrect, read Page 2. there is permission.

No Permission = cannot do it

Yes, but it is a good thing we have permission.

Remember: "Different" must mean different powers because It cannot mean different castings. As same castings cannot exist because a Psyker can only attempt to manifest a power once per turn.

Remember that "Unless otherwise stated, the effects of multiple different psychic powers are cumulative." (68) Does not mean that the effects of multiple of the same psychic powers are not cumulative.

"permission to do X means you CANNOT do Y!" is logically incorrect.

 Bausk wrote:
If you read my post you may have drawn the conclusion yourself. There is no denial, however there is no Permission to Accumulate Hammerhand with Hammerhand. Here's the short version for you:

+ Permissive rule set
+ Permission only granted for different powers to accumulate
+ No permission for same powers to accumulate (unless specified in their entry)

No Permission = cannot do it

Remember: "Different" must mean different powers because It cannot mean different castings. As same castings cannot exist because a Psyker can only attempt to manifest a power once per turn.

There is permission to resolve according to the test of the power, yes?
Please cite why you're denying that permission. Because the text of the power requires that I add 1 STR.

Text removed --yakface

Ok I will try to make this as simple as I can.

As a Permissive rule set we assume no permission unless the rules grant permission yes?

Denial doesn't really exist in this sort of rule set, only restrictions or limitations on permissions exist.

We must assume no permission for anything unless the rules state otherwise.

psyker usr gives permission to use the psyker rules on pages 66-69.

Yes we are given permission to resolve a power, however under the secrion Resolving a Psychic Power we are only given permission for different powers to accumulate.

Without this permission no powers could accumulate. As it only specifies different powers can then only different powers are given permission to accumulate.

 Bausk wrote:
Ok I will try to make this as simple as I can.

As a Permissive rule set we assume no permission unless the rules grant permission yes?

Denial doesn't really exist in this sort of rule set, only restrictions or limitations on permissions exist.

We must assume no permission for anything unless the rules state otherwise.

psyker usr gives permission to use the psyker rules on pages 66-69.

Yes we are given permission to resolve a power, however under the secrion Resolving a Psychic Power we are only given permission for different powers to accumulate.

Without this permission no powers could accumulate. As it only specifies different powers can then only different powers are given permission to accumulate.

And Page 2 gives permission for multiple modifiers to stack. Ergo 4+1+1 = 6.

Find the restriction of this permission or label your posts How you would play it and not RAW.

Page two is not in tje psyker section and is not permission. It is rules for how multiple modifiers are permitted to accumulate, if they are. Please cite a relevant rule from the psyker section or related codex granting permission for a power to be cumulative with itself.

Example: Codex CSM page 71 Symphony of Pain, Last sentence: Note the effects of more than one Symphony of Pain are cumulative.

 Bausk wrote:
Page two is not in tje psyker section and is not permission. It is rules for how multiple modifiers are permitted to accumulate, if they are. Please cite a relevant rule from the psyker section or related codex granting permission for a power to be cumulative with itself.

Example: Codex CSM page 71 Symphony of Pain, Last sentence: Note the effects of more than one Symphony of Pain are cumulative.

Bausk, I have permission to cast and resolve a psychic power in accordance with its entry, correct?
If so, I have permission to cast the same psychic power (albeit with a different Psyker) on the same unit, correct?

Please state where there is denial to resolve the psychic power in accordance with its entry. Also note that "different powers stack" is not denial for same psychic powers.

Again denial is not implied. You have permission to resolve the power following the full rules for resolving the power. The power and it's effects are not inherently permitted to be cumulative, this is the assumption being made that is incorrect.

In the rules for resolving powers we are given permission to accumulate the effects pf different powers. Thus reqire permission for same powers effects to be cumulative as per the example in my previous post.

 Bausk wrote:
Yes we are given permission to resolve a power, however under the secrion Resolving a Psychic Power we are only given permission for different powers to accumulate.

I underlined your irrelevant statement. The fact that you feel it's worth pointing out proves you're not actually understanding the argument.

You agree there is permission to resolve the power according to its text.
The text adds +1 STR.
It's cast twice, so +1 STR is added twice.
What rules do we govern the fact that there are now multiple modifiers in the unit?

Also we can, but often don't bother as it's pointless, resolve effects to no or no additional effect.

Example: A unit of guardsmen with nothing but lasguns only has a rhino in range and los. The unit could fire at the rhino as it has permission tp make a shooting attack at a viable target in its shooting phase.

The unit could roll to hit, roll to penetrate and resolve the shooting attack with absolutely no effect. However we know this is a waste of time so we don't bother making such pointless rolls.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rigid: clearly you misunderstood that +1S is a powers effect and at no point are you given permission to accumulate the same effect twice. You may resolve the second Hammerhand all you want, but it's effect may only be cumulative with a different power to itself. Essentially you're wasting time like those poor guardsmen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So yes you have permission to resolve any and all powers. However the rules for resolving a psychic power only permit different powers effects to be cumulative. Resolving doesn't intrinsically mean apply the effect fully or at all.

 Bausk wrote:
However the rules for resolving a psychic power only permit different powers effects to be cumulative.

[citation needed]

Bask - yet for the specific effect +1S we DO HAVE permission to accumulate. It is in page two

You are making up a spurious requirement to have a specific permission to accumulate THE CYPUMULATIVE OPERATOR just because it is a psychic power, while ignoring tht general permission has been given, and absent any restriction that permission being revoked, it still stands.

 Bausk wrote:
Rigid: clearly you misunderstood that +1S is a powers effect and at no point are you given permission to accumulate the same effect twice. You may resolve the second Hammerhand all you want, but it's effect may only be cumulative with a different power to itself. Essentially you're wasting time like those poor guardsmen.

Does the unit have multiple modifiers that need to be applied, or not?
If not, can you cite a rule supporting that?

Unit: Have done look back though the posts and you will find the page number and quote.

Nos: Page two is not the rules for psykers, cite something relevant for a change.

Rigid: No it does not as at no point are you given permission to apply the same powers effect twice unlike powers like Symphony of Pain which has such permission detailed in its rules.

 Bausk wrote:
Rigid: No it does not as at no point are you given permission to apply the same powers effect twice unlike powers like Symphony of Pain which has such permission detailed in its rules.

Here is where your argument falls apart.

"Assuming that the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not nullify it through a successful Deny the \Witch roll, you can now resolve the psychic power according to instructions in its entry. " (68)

Point 1) Hammerhand instructs you to apply a +1 to the unit's Strength score. Agreed?

Point 2) We have permission for multiple Psykers that are in the same unit to cast Hammerhand. Agreed?

Point 3) Page 2, Multiple modifiers, deals with the situation where you have multiple additions or subtractions applied to a single model or unit. Agreed?

If you do not agree please cite some actual rules restricting any of these rules.

 Bausk wrote:
Again denial is not implied. You have permission to resolve the power following the full rules for resolving the power. The power and it's effects are not inherently permitted to be cumulative, this is the assumption being made that is incorrect.

In the rules for resolving powers we are given permission to accumulate the effects pf different powers. Thus reqire permission for same powers effects to be cumulative as per the example in my previous post.

I make no such assumption, page 2 explicitly states multiple modifiers are applied cumulatively. The effect of Hammerhand is a modifier, ergo, it can be applied cumulatively.

 Bausk wrote:
Unit: Have done look back though the posts and you will find the page number and quote.

Having looked back throughout the whole thread, I have not seen a single quote which says that only different psychic powers are cumulative. I saw a few that say that different psychic powers are cumulative, but that's just permission for different psychic powers to be cumulative - I didn't see anything forbidding the same psychic power to be cumulative.

DR: Yes you may resolve the power, read resolving psychic powers without assumed permission for any power, different or the same, to be cumulative. knowing that different means differnt powers not casters as a single caster cannot manifest thr same power twice in a turn.

1) Hammerhands effect is +1S applied before multplication. The distinction of it being its effect is important.

2) Permission is granted for many psykers to manifest the same power with the same target. Absolutely correct, however it may be pointless.

3) At this point you jump the gun and miss the resolution rules and go straight to application of the effect.

Page two is a mechanic for many things, it is not however permission for accumulation of effects.

 Bausk wrote:
Page two is a mechanic for many things, it is not however permission for accumulation of effects.

And here is where your argument falls apart when dealing with Multiple +1 modifiers.

Re-read page 2.

PR: Page two is not permission for multiples of the same powers effect to be cumulative, just because a powers effect is a modifier it doesn't change the fact it is a power and follow the powers rules before page two is considered.

Unit: Correct, you also won't find any quotes giving permission for same powers effects to be cumulative only the quote for different powers. It is only assumed that same powers effects may be cumulative based on one of two flawed misconceptions.

1) Assumed Accumulation from permission to resolve. Which has been shown that we can resolve to no added or no effect.

2) Assumed Accumulation from skipping the rules for resolution and just applying the effect to claim page two as permission for Accumulation. Which again has been proven to be incorrect.

Or are you saying that something restricts you from resolving "the psychic power according to instructions in its entry." (68)?

If so please cite the rule that restricts a psyker from resolving a second casting of Hammerhand on a single unit.

As long as we're ignoring the explicit statement that multiple modifiers are cumulative on page 2, I'd very much like to have someone prove, either empirically or logically, that an assumption of non-cumulation is even capable of trumping a rules-based permission to apply an effect in a permissive ruleset.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Page two is a mechanic for many things, it is not however permission for accumulation of effects.

And here is where your argument falls apart when dealing with Multiple +1 modifiers.

Re-read page 2.

If I had multiple modifiers, say from two different Psychic powers effects like iron arm and might of titans, I would consult page two. But I am dealing with modifiers from two manifestations of the same powers effects, which I have no permission in the psyker section to accumulate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tell you what, if you can find any permission for the same powers effect to be cumulative that is just as definitive as the permission for different powers effects to be cumulative in the psyker section or grey knight codex I will concede. Till then I will stick to reading the rules with the base idea that nothing is permitted unless the rules state it is.

 Bausk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Page two is a mechanic for many things, it is not however permission for accumulation of effects.

And here is where your argument falls apart when dealing with Multiple +1 modifiers.

Re-read page 2.

If I had multiple modifiers, say from two different Psychic powers effects like iron arm and might of titans, I would consult page two. But I am dealing with modifiers from two manifestations of the same powers effects, which I have no permission in the psyker section to accumulate.

Ok, so which step of manifesting the psychic power is denied permission?

 Bausk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Page two is a mechanic for many things, it is not however permission for accumulation of effects.

And here is where your argument falls apart when dealing with Multiple +1 modifiers.

Re-read page 2.

If I had multiple modifiers, say from two different Psychic powers effects like iron arm and might of titans, I would consult page two. But I am dealing with modifiers from two manifestations of the same powers effects, which I have no permission in the psyker section to accumulate.

Yes you do. Where is the denial? Cite it.

 Bausk wrote:
2) Permission is granted for many psykers to manifest the same power with the same target. Absolutely correct, however it may be pointless.

Why would it be pointless, do you have a rules quote that tells restricts multiples of the same power from resolving its effects?

We are instructed to "resolve the psychic power according to instructions in its entry. " (68)

According to Hammerhand we apply a +1 modifier to the units Strength.

Please, just once, cite a restriction on this. Some actual rule that restricts you from resolving a second or third casting of Hammerhand.

If you do not provide a quote, as per the tenets of the forum, I will have to assume youa re arguing How you would play it and not arguing RAW.

For the last time, denial doesn't exist in a permissive rule set. Only permissions with limitations or restrictions.

For instance the movement phase. We assume no permission to even move the unit from the start. The rules grant us permission to move the unit but then restrict us to the units listed maximum movement. It also gives us permission to not move at all and permission to move less than the units maximum movement.

Each facet of the rules is based on this abundantly simple concept. I have shown permission for different powers effects to be cumulative in the relevant section of the rules. I have also shown that at no point in the relevant rules are we given permission for the same powers effect to be cumulative.

The onus is not mine to prove denial where none should exist. The onus is yours to prove permission exists.

We have proved permission for every single step of manifesting and resolving the power.

You, meanwhile, have yet to show any support for your argument whatsoever apart from that you think it works that way.

So am I to infer you have a different interpretation of what a permissive rule set is?

Please enlighten us.

A permissive ruleset is one in which denial is assumed for everything you wish to do. This assumption can be overrided by a rule that grants permission, which is in turn overriden by a rule which provides denial, which can be overturned by a rule that grants specific permission to ignore the denial, which can then be overturned by a rule that specifically denies this specific permission. For instance:

1. It is the assault phase after assault moves but before blows are struck, my Psyker has a warp charge available and has not used used Hammerhand this turn, so I have permission to manifest Hammerhand. - "This power is used during the Assault phase in either's player turn, after assault moves have been made, but before any blows are struck."

2. I have permission to follow the usual steps for manifesting a psychic power in pages 67=68 as my Librarian is a Psyker.

3. I have permission to resolve the power according to instructions in its entry. - "Assuming that the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not nullify it through a successful Deny the \Witch roll, you can now resolve the psychic power according to instructions in its entry."

4. The Hammerhand entry instructs me to apply +1 Strength to the unit, so I do. - "If the psychic test is passed, all models in the unit (including independent characters) have +1 Strength until the end of the Assault phase."

5. The unit already has had Hammerhand cast on it, so I have 2 +1 Strength modifiers, following the rules for multiple modifiers, Each model's current strength is now +2. - "If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values."

Observe how I have permission to do each step, since I have rules-based permission I override any assumptions of denial and it requires an actual rule to deny permission.

Denial is absolutely required in a permissive ruleset.

For example, I have blanket permission to move models. However, an immobilized vehicle has had it's permission removed denied.

So, through Hammerhand, we have blanket permission to add +1 strength (given that you pass a psychic check, et al).

You'd have to find a denial to prevent it from working.

PR: Step three, you have permission to resolve the power following the rules for resolving a psychic power in which only permits different powers effects to be cumulative. I say only as it is the only mention of powers effects being cumulative and as such is the only rule for powers effects being permitted to be cumulative. Just thought I would point that out seeing as you missed it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unit: Immobilization is removal/revocation of permission which is not the same as denial.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lets use that though. For there to be a removal/revocation of permission for same powers effects to be cumulative there first must be permission that is not assumed.

There is no denial of permission either, so we continue to resolve the power according to its entry, as we have permission to do so.

 Bausk wrote:
Lets use that though. For there to be a removal/revocation of permission for same powers effects to be cumulative there first must be permission that is not assumed.

We have permission to resolve the power.

The power grants +1 strength.

If you cast the power twice, you have permission to resolve the power both times.

The power grands +1 strength, twice.

If you cast the power three times, you have permission to resolve the power all three times.

The power grants +1 strength, three times.

PR: That's the dakka equivalent of a child's response. You stated the default state of permission in a permissive rule set is no permission. If no permission is given and no permission is removed/revoked then the default of no permission is what you have.

Unit: We have permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative. Resolution can be to no additional effect or no effect at all.

Permission is given to resolve the power, denial of resolution is not given apart from assumptions. Since the permission is rules-based and the denial is assumption-based the permission wins because rules always trump assumptions in a permissive ruleset.

 Bausk wrote:
Unit: We have permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative. Resolution can be to no additional effect or no effect at all.

Is there a reason to expect it would have a different (or no) effect on subsequent resolutions than it did on the first?

 Bausk wrote:
PR: Step three, you have permission to resolve the power following the rules for resolving a psychic power in which only permits different powers effects to be cumulative. I say only as it is the only mention of powers effects being cumulative and as such is the only rule for powers effects being permitted to be cumulative. Just thought I would point that out seeing as you missed it.

(Emphasis mine).
Fixed that for you.

I struck through your error. The word only should not be there. In fact the rule that "permits different powers effects to be cumulative" has nothing to do with the same power. Why do you keep citing that?

If we have permission to cast and resolve a power that gives a modifier, if we cast that power twice we are left with multiple modifiers since the rules say to resolve each power. Page 2 then kicks in and permits us to apply any additions by the rules of basic math. Ergo 4+1+1=6.

Since you can not find any restrictions in the rule book, please follow the tenets of the forum and mark your posts How you would play it.

PR: You're still assuming permission to be cumulative fom just resolution, whereas in the rules for resolution we only have one reference on what is or is not permitted to be cumulative.

Unit: Same answer as PR.

DR: I have said previous to this the reason Ipreface the statement with only and it is because it is the only reference in the psyker rules section pertaining to accumulation. As it is the only statement on the matter the it is the only permission for accumulation we have.

I have blanket permission to resolve, therefore I have permission to resolve even if Hammerhand has already been manifested on the unit.

PR: Permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative. Especially when different effects are given explicit permission and same effects are not.

I'm making no assumptions, I'm stating I have permission to resolve and there is no rules-based denial based on non-cumulativity. The assumption of not being cumulative cannot trump rules-based permission to resolve and apply the effects.

 Bausk wrote:
PR: Permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative.

It does when the rule states you use a naturally cumulative/stacking symbol.
Or does the game define "+" as being something other than the standard usage? (It doesn't)
If they didn't want it to be stacking, they shouldn't have used "+" as it is by it's very nature stacking.

Also you're not looking for permission. You're looking for a double permission, which just isn't needed.
Permission is given through every single step to apply a subsequent modifiers. Yet you want a second permission on top of all this. Something saying it's allowed, when each step already allows it.
It's not needed.

The OP solved his problem on page1. Do you really still want to beat this dead horse on and on and on? Remember that the new edition will come anyway so no need to still argue points that have already been discussed to death. There will be a lot of new bloated rules to tear us apart over in ~3 weeks hopefully.

 Mywik wrote:
The OP solved his problem on page1. Do you really still want to beat this dead horse on and on and on? Remember that the new edition will come anyway so no need to still argue points that have already been discussed to death. There will be a lot of new bloated rules to tear us apart over in ~3 weeks hopefully.

Ah well, it's entertaining to see the con-stacking side struggling to find anything supporting their opinion, desperately grasping for straws. It's another example of a thread where the correct answer was on page 1 and then, endless, pointless debating started.

tl;dr: Hammerhand stacks with itself if cast by a different psyker. Detailed explanations have been provided above multiple times.

 Bausk wrote:
PR: Permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative. Especially when different effects are given explicit permission and same effects are not.

First: please stop misspelling my name.
Second: I have permission to resolve both powers.
This resolution uses mathematical instructions.
Where in the rulebook would I go to find how to handle the maths involved?

 Sigvatr wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Unless anyone comes up with an exact quote from the BRB that says that psychic powers are special rules, every single point you try to make is a waste of time.

So every model in the game can use psychic powers ?

Read the posts. You don't know what "special rules" means. "Special Rules" does NOT mean that it's a special rule if you use "special" as an everyday term. Special rules in Warhammer 40k are explicitely given by the BRB itself as pointed out in my previous posts.

Please refer to the tennets of YMDC:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

Especially this:

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

So you had no answer ? Instead run off on a tangent about the tenets. Nothing in my question referenced a "definition". Perhaps you can stay on topic rather than cite the tenets. But I noticed your falling back on that to multiple threads, obviously your argument is falling apart that you've gone on such a defensive.

Ask a proper question and you will certainly get an answer. If you don't know where to find a unit's special rules or don't know what a certain rule means, open a thread in YMDC and ask for it. I'd be glad to help you out. Feel free to PM me as well if you need help with something and I might be able to help you out.

I'm not wasting my breath on rhetorical questions, though.

The rhetorical question had a point, which shows how incorrect you were in your statement about Special Rules. But I can see you dont care to be shown how wrong you are.

Unless you want to rebutt anything someone else mentions with actual rules, you missed the point of YMDC.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Fragile wrote:
So every model in the game can use psychic powers ?

Every model that has the special rule psyker can.

You need a special rule to cast Psychic powers.

Psychic powers themselves though are not special rules.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
I have blanket permission to resolve, therefore I have permission to resolve even if Hammerhand has already been manifested on the unit.

making it to the resolve step is not blanket permission for effect.

I can go through all of the steps to resolve any psychic shooting attack as long as the target is in line of sight.

There is no requirement for range under declare target or any of the other steps to resolve a psychic attack.

Therefore you can reach resolve psychic attack for a psychic shooting attack that is out of range, using your logic that making it to resolve step means the power has to have an effect now means psychic shooting attacks all have unlimited range.

obviously they do not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Mywik wrote:
The OP solved his problem on page1. Do you really still want to beat this dead horse on and on and on? Remember that the new edition will come anyway so no need to still argue points that have already been discussed to death. There will be a lot of new bloated rules to tear us apart over in ~3 weeks hopefully.

Ah well, it's entertaining to see the con-stacking side struggling to find anything supporting their opinion, desperately grasping for straws. It's another example of a thread where the correct answer was on page 1 and then, endless, pointless debating started.

tl;dr: Hammerhand stacks with itself if cast by a different psyker. Detailed explanations have been provided above multiple times.

so despite your opinion not being RAW.

How do you resolve the RAW that different characteristic bonus and penalties stack?

And no mention that ones from the same source do stack.

Do you believe that bit of RAW was intentionally put in there as a red herring?

blaktoof, how are you nominating a unit that is out of range for a psychic power?

its not a requirement on p.67 for resolving a psychic power.

some people seem to believe if you follow the rules on p.67 your power works no matter what, this is false.

For resolving no, but it is a requirement before you even get there. Prior to expending a Warp Charge you must first nominate a unit.

you must declare a target, which only requires they are in line of sight.

also its worth noting you expend warp charge before declaring a target.

blaktoof wrote:
you must first declare a target, which only requires they are in line of sight.

While the powers section only requires LOS, the powers themselves require the range to declare the target.

Fragile wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
you must first declare a target, which only requires they are in line of sight.

While the powers section only requires LOS, the powers themselves require the range to declare the target.

I agree with you.

The point is the rules on p.67 for resolving a power you can complete all of them for a psychic power that is out of range and make it to the resolve step.

Simply making it to the resolve step does not absolve you of other rules and is not blanket permission for the power to work, which some people in this thread have the highly false opinion that it does.

blaktoof wrote:
Therefore you can reach resolve psychic attack for a psychic shooting attack that is out of range, using your logic that making it to resolve step means the power has to have an effect now means psychic shooting attacks all have unlimited range.

obviously they do not.

It's almost like there's a requirement under the power that has to be met..
Oh right - range.
Is there an additional requirement under Hammerhand?

blaktoof wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
I have blanket permission to resolve, therefore I have permission to resolve even if Hammerhand has already been manifested on the unit.

making it to the resolve step is not blanket permission for effect.

I can go through all of the steps to resolve any psychic shooting attack as long as the target is in line of sight.

There is no requirement for range under declare target or any of the other steps to resolve a psychic attack.

Therefore you can reach resolve psychic attack for a psychic shooting attack that is out of range, using your logic that making it to resolve step means the power has to have an effect now means psychic shooting attacks all have unlimited range.

obviously they do not.

"Any model that is found to be out of range of all visible enemy models in the target unit doesn't shoot"

So even if you can resolve the psychic shooting attack, if you don't have range you can't fire, so the power resolves with you shooting the target unit with 0 models.

Also, what does this have to do with Hammerhand? It very clearly is not a psychic shooting attack.

Bausk - so again, whya r4e you creatingin an additional permission step where none is needed?

The "+" symbol is cumulative. 100% true. Saying +1+1 is not equal to +2 is factyually incorrect.

As you are unable to back your opinion with a single rule, please makr your posts "HYWPI"

The correct answer has been found on every page since page 1, which is that hammerhand "stacks" with itself, because it uses "+1", and as per page 2 you have permission to use maths and their symbols. Not a single shred of evidence exisdts to remove this permission, and anyone saying it cannot stack has no rules argument for this opinion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bausk - for that final comment, reported.

They do use maths. They use the mathematical operator "+"£ and do not use a 40k definition for it, therefore they are using the normal mathematical operator "+", whcih by DEFINITION is cumulative

If you disagree with this statement of fact, then this does make it clear why you insist on this extra step, as you have no connection to the written rules at all.

Same old same old, for too long.