I was specifically thinking about Chaos Maulerfiends' Lasher Tendrils, but I suppose this question can be applied to any ability or piece of wargear that subtracts enemy attacks from their profile - does it only affect their base profile or does it also incorporate and any all attack bonuses they receive? My query came up after the following exchange in another thread:

 Sir Arun wrote:

 lessthanjeff wrote:
Yeah, the lasher tendrils are disappointing too in the sense that a lot of people miss it only reduces the attacks characteristic. That means people still get the bonuses from 2 weapons or from charging so it rarely reduces the number of attacks of anyone at all. Shoulda been a free side-grade imo.

You sure it works this way?

My understanding is that attack bonuses are applied before they are subtracted - not the other way round. If for example a Black Templar Initiate squad (thats standard space marines armed with bp+ccw) charge a Maulerfiend, each would have 3 attacks (1 base, 1 for 2ccws and 1 for charging). Each set of Lasher Tendrils would subtract 1 attack each, leaving everyone with 1 attack per guy.

Rules:



Example:

A Space Marine Veteran Sergeant with two powerfists (base profile: 2 Attacks) charges the Maulerfiend. He would get 2 bonus attacks (+1 for charging, +1 for two specialist weapons), but each of the Maulerfiend's 2 sets of Lasher Tendrils would subtract 1 attack from the model's Attacks characteristic.


Method A: We apply the Maulerfiend's Lasher Tendrils' rules first, and thus subtract the Space Marine Veteran Sergeant's Attacks from his Attacks characteristic before any bonuses. This would reduce his Attacks by -2, but because Attacks can only be reduced to a minimum of 1, the Space Marine Veteran Sergeant would only lose 1 Attack. We then apply all bonuses (+1 for charging, +1 for two specialist weapons) and the Space Marine Veteran Sergeant ends up delivering 3 powerfist attacks onto the Maulerfiend.

Reasoning backing this: Page 49 of the BRB under the Number of Attacks section reads: "Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:"

Conclusion: Bonus attacks are not part of the Attacks characteristic - they do not modify it, but add to it. You make a number of attacks equal to X (attacks characteristic) + Y (bonus attacks). X is the number on your profile. Y is not. Y modifies the number of attacks you made, not the number on your profile. Lasher Tendrils specifically states that it affects the Attacks characteristic, not the attacks a model has, therefore it only modifies the base profile.


Method B: We apply all modifiers first, bringing the Space Marine Veteran Sergeant up to 4 attacks. We then apply the rules from both sets of Lasher Tendrils and subtract 2 attacks, bringing the Space Marine Veteran Sergeant down to 2 attacks. This order of operations follows the mathematical rules of PEMDAS, i.e. add before subtract.

Reasoning backing this: Page 8 of the BRB under the Modifiers section says: "Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)."

The above implies that the Attacks characteristic is being modified. Furthermore, note the capitalization of the word Attack. The English language does not usually capitalize nouns unless they hold a special meaning - in this case being the proper name of the unit characteristic responsible for dealing damage in close combat. Page 49 of the BRB, under the Number of Attacks section, describes what Charge Bonus, Two Weapons etc. do -> the model gets +1 Attack, not +1 attack.

Conclusion: Bonus attacks are a special rule (what else are they?) that directly modify a unit's Attacks characteristic instead of adding to it, therefore they are taken into account before subtraction.

"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."

What are Lasher Tendrils? Multipliers, subtractions or a set value?
If the wording is "reduce the A to 1", then you are doing -x = 1
If the wording is "the enemy only has 1 A" then that is a set modifier.

Apply Core Rules - Multiple Modifiers. Multipliers, then additions / subtractions, then set values. Bonus attacks for 2CCWs etc. are still modifiers.

1A base, +1 for charging, +1 for 2CCW, -1 for Tendrils (or however many it subtracts) = 2 attacks.

 Quanar wrote:
Apply Core Rules - Multiple Modifiers. Multipliers, then additions / subtractions, then set values. Bonus attacks for 2CCWs etc. are still modifiers.

1A base, +1 for charging, +1 for 2CCW, -1 for Tendrils (or however many it subtracts) = 2 attacks.

Not actually correct. The Lasher Tendrils reduce the Attacks Characteristic by 1 (to a minimum of 1) so will have no effect on a model with an Attack Characteristic of less than 2.

Dra'al Nacht wrote:
Not actually correct. The Lasher Tendrils reduce the Attacks Characteristic by 1 (to a minimum of 1) so will have no effect on a model with an Attack Characteristic of less than 2.

Hum, I can see the point in the debate if it specifically mentions "characteristic", whereas bonus attacks don't necessarily modify the characteristic - they just modify the number of attacks.
Compare to a Dark Eldar Shardnet, which reduces the number of attacks rather than the characteristic.

Still not sure on my HIWPI, but no one cares about mine anyways.

And 2 CCW increase the attack characteristic by 1, so i'm not sure why you are seeing a difference.

You have a base: 1A
you have "additions or subtractions": +1A +1A -1A.

Result: You have 2A. Quanar is correct by RaW

 BlackTalos wrote:
And 2 CCW increase the attack characteristic by 1, so i'm not sure why you are seeing a difference.

You have a base: 1A
you have "additions or subtractions": +1A +1A -1A.

Result: You have 2A. Quanar is correct by RaW

Under Number of Attacks in the Assault Phase section, we are told that a model makes a number of Attacks equal to its Attacks Characteristic, plus certain bonus Attacks. It does not actually tell us to modify the Attacks Characteristic itself.

If you are trying to imply that CCW and Charging is a "certain bonus Attacks" and not actually a "then apply any additions or subtractions" of the A Characteristic, then you will agree that these happen independently to "and finally apply any set values" too.

If the Lasher Tendrils do not combine with CCW and Charge (or Rage) as a +1, +1 (+2), -1, then you will surely agree that Smash attacks do not combine with CCW and Charge (or Rage) as a +1, +1 (+2), Set modifier=1.

I am not disagreeing with your theory, but consistency would mean you Smash with 1A plus charge and CCW. Some might not agree with such a conclusion is all...

According to PEMDAS, which GW appears to follow.

You would do addition first and then subtraction.

So yes, they would add up their attacks to 3 and then you would reduce those.

But IIRC 2 sets of lasher tendrils don't stack.

 Grey Templar wrote:
But IIRC 2 sets of lasher tendrils don't stack.

They explicitly stack.

 BlackTalos wrote:
And 2 CCW increase the attack characteristic by 1, so i'm not sure why you are seeing a difference.

No, they do not. They increase how many *attacks* you get, but not your attack characteristic.

You have a base: 1A
you have "additions or subtractions": +1A +1A -1A.

Result: You have 2A. Quanar is correct by RaW

No again, because the RAW says to reduce the attack *characteristic*, the models attack *characteristic* is 1A, so it doesn't go any lower, then other modifiers are added/subtracted.

IF the RAW said reduce the attacks (and never mentioned 'characteristic') then you would be correct.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackTalos wrote:
If you are trying to imply that CCW and Charging is a "certain bonus Attacks" and not actually a "then apply any additions or subtractions" of the A Characteristic, then you will agree that these happen independently to "and finally apply any set values" too.

If the Lasher Tendrils do not combine with CCW and Charge (or Rage) as a +1, +1 (+2), -1, then you will surely agree that Smash attacks do not combine with CCW and Charge (or Rage) as a +1, +1 (+2), Set modifier=1.

I am not disagreeing with your theory, but consistency would mean you Smash with 1A plus charge and CCW. Some might not agree with such a conclusion is all...

Smash Attack is perfect for this.

Last edition, Smash Attack reduced your *attack characteristic* by half, so things like Charge bonus and extra attacks were not affected.
This edition, Smash Attack refers to just 'attacks' and does not mention 'characteristic', so it applies to all of the attacks.

I do not see the issue.

You use the multiple modifiers in the brb to determine number of attacks.

You have a model with 1 attack that charged and has 2 weapons in base with a model with the Chaos Maulerfiends' Lasher Tendrils'

The model has 1 attack, -1 from tendrils, +1 from launching an assault and +1 from two weapons.

So 1-1+1+1=2 attacks.

 DeathReaper wrote:
I do not see the issue.

You use the multiple modifiers in the brb to determine number of attacks.

You have a model with 1 attack that charged and has 2 weapons in base with a model with the Chaos Maulerfiends' Lasher Tendrils'

The model has 1 attack, -1 from tendrils, +1 from launching an assault and +1 from two weapons.

So 1-1+1+1=2 attacks.

2 sets of tendrils is -2 attacks (and a Maulerfiend can't have a single set of tendrils). Just a small correction.

I'm not seeing the point of the question. IS there a case where it is working out differently? I'm also not seeing a quote for the lasher rule.

Is someone trying to "-1 Attack" to a Smash which only gives 1A and make it zero?

Otherwise 1+1-1 =1-1+1

If there is a "gets double attacks" the order will matter, but not for just addition or subtraction, and set modifiers come at the end anyway (so Smash=1, no matter how many negatives you stack on it).

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:
I'm not seeing the point of the question. IS there a case where it is working out differently? I'm also not seeing a quote for the lasher rule.

Is someone trying to "-1 Attack" to a Smash which only gives 1A and make it zero?

Otherwise 1+1-1 =1-1+1

If there is a "gets double attacks" the order will matter, but not for just addition or subtraction, and set modifiers come at the end anyway (so Smash=1, no matter how many negatives you stack on it).

Lashers subtract one from the Attacks Characteristic.


Since (for example) Assault Marines have a 1 Attacks characteristic, you subtract 2 (to a minimum of 1) and then add a bonus attack for two weapons (not added to the Attacks characteristic) and another bonus attack for charging (again, not added to the Attacks characteristic).

So it's (1-2(floor 1))+1+1=3.

rigeld2 wrote:

Since (for example) Assault Marines have a 1 Attacks characteristic, you subtract 2 (to a minimum of 1) and then add a bonus attack for two weapons (not added to the Attacks characteristic) and another bonus attack for charging (again, not added to the Attacks characteristic).

So it's (1-2(floor 1))+1+1=3.

This.



The Smash Attack from last edition was "division", but it applied to the attack *characteristic*, so it did not wait for the 'adds' of charge and bonus weapons...

rigeld2 wrote:

Lashers subtract one from the Attacks Characteristic.

Spoiler:

Each set of lasher tendrils reduces the Attacks characteristics of every model (friend and foe) in base contact with the bearer by 1 (to a minimum of 1) whilst they remain in base contact. The effects of multiple sets are cumulative.

Since (for example) Assault Marines have a 1 Attacks characteristic, you subtract 2 (to a minimum of 1) and then add a bonus attack for two weapons (not added to the Attacks characteristic) and another bonus attack for charging (again, not added to the Attacks characteristic).

So it's (1-2(floor 1))+1+1=3.

The floor is only applicable after the calculation is finished.

rigeld2 wrote:

Lashers subtract one from the Attacks Characteristic.

Spoiler:

Each set of lasher tendrils reduces the Attacks characteristics of every model (friend and foe) in base contact with the bearer by 1 (to a minimum of 1) whilst they remain in base contact. The effects of multiple sets are cumulative.

Since (for example) Assault Marines have a 1 Attacks characteristic, you subtract 2 (to a minimum of 1) and then add a bonus attack for two weapons (not added to the Attacks characteristic) and another bonus attack for charging (again, not added to the Attacks characteristic).

So it's (1-2(floor 1))+1+1=3.

Thanks for the quote. Yes, since it modifies the Attacks characteristic I'd go with that same reading. If I'm swinging two lightning claws or whatever at your head, that's two potential hits even if I only swing once (I'd guess the bonus from charging is a power armour headbutt or whatever, fluffwise). If I'm so skilled I can swing my VV sword twice (thrice on a vet sergent), that's where the lasher stuff would seem to come into play.

Rule wise:
"Number of Attacks
Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks: "

So yeah, lasher whips don't work on bonus attacks, which are defined in the same section.

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Lashers subtract one from the Attacks Characteristic.

Spoiler:

Each set of lasher tendrils reduces the Attacks characteristics of every model (friend and foe) in base contact with the bearer by 1 (to a minimum of 1) whilst they remain in base contact. The effects of multiple sets are cumulative.

Since (for example) Assault Marines have a 1 Attacks characteristic, you subtract 2 (to a minimum of 1) and then add a bonus attack for two weapons (not added to the Attacks characteristic) and another bonus attack for charging (again, not added to the Attacks characteristic).

So it's (1-2(floor 1))+1+1=3.

Thanks for the quote. Yes, since it modifies the Attacks characteristic I'd go with that same reading. If I'm swinging two lightning claws or whatever at your head, that's two potential hits even if I only swing once (I'd guess the bonus from charging is a power armour headbutt or whatever, fluffwise). If I'm so skilled I can swing my VV sword twice (thrice on a vet sergent), that's where the lasher stuff would seem to come into play.

Rule wise:
"Number of Attacks
Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks: "

So yeah, lasher whips don't work on bonus attacks, which are defined in the same section.

They work on bonus attacks, why would they not?

"• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.

• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each." (The Assault Phase chapter, Number of Attacks section).

Each give +1 attack. They are also special rules that modify a characteristic, so lowering the characteristic would take bonuses into account as bonuses add to the characteristic.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)." (Models & Units chapter, Modifiers section).

 DeathReaper wrote:


The floor is only applicable after the calculation is finished.

It *is* finished. The Attack Characteristic is "number on profile +/- any modifiers x// any modifiers then set modifiers. Then the calculation for determining the Attack Characteristic is finished.

To determine the number of allowed attacks is " Attack characteristic +/- any modfiers...etc"

Those whips are used to calculate the characteristic, not the number of allowed attacks that turn.


This is the *SAME* way Smash Attack worked last edition....




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:
.

Each give +1 attack. They are also special rules that modify a characteristic, so lowering the characteristic would take bonuses into account as bonuses add to the characteristic.

Please provide the rule quote stating these are changes to the *characteristic*...


And while you are at it, explain why Smash Attack worked the way it did last edition.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Lashers subtract one from the Attacks Characteristic.

Spoiler:

Each set of lasher tendrils reduces the Attacks characteristics of every model (friend and foe) in base contact with the bearer by 1 (to a minimum of 1) whilst they remain in base contact. The effects of multiple sets are cumulative.

Since (for example) Assault Marines have a 1 Attacks characteristic, you subtract 2 (to a minimum of 1) and then add a bonus attack for two weapons (not added to the Attacks characteristic) and another bonus attack for charging (again, not added to the Attacks characteristic).

So it's (1-2(floor 1))+1+1=3.

The floor is only applicable after the calculation is finished.

Not true, as the modification is made to the attack characteristic, NOT the number of attacks.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Lashers subtract one from the Attacks Characteristic.

Spoiler:

Each set of lasher tendrils reduces the Attacks characteristics of every model (friend and foe) in base contact with the bearer by 1 (to a minimum of 1) whilst they remain in base contact. The effects of multiple sets are cumulative.

Since (for example) Assault Marines have a 1 Attacks characteristic, you subtract 2 (to a minimum of 1) and then add a bonus attack for two weapons (not added to the Attacks characteristic) and another bonus attack for charging (again, not added to the Attacks characteristic).

So it's (1-2(floor 1))+1+1=3.

The floor is only applicable after the calculation is finished.

Correct.
And the calculation of the Attacks characteristic is finished. Therefore the floor is applied, as I've proven.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Rule wise:
"Number of Attacks
Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks: "

Underlined the emphasis that the bonus attacks are not part of the characteristic.

"• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.

• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each." (The Assault Phase chapter, Number of Attacks section).

Each give +1 attack. They are also special rules that modify a characteristic, so lowering the characteristic would take bonuses into account as bonuses add to the characteristic.

I underlined your assumption that has no rules support. Given the other quote, bonus attacks do not modify the characteristic, they modify the number of attacks.

coredump wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
.

Each give +1 attack. They are also special rules that modify a characteristic, so lowering the characteristic would take bonuses into account as bonuses add to the characteristic.

Please provide the rule quote stating these are changes to the *characteristic*...

I have, but here it is again:

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)." (Models & Units chapter, Modifiers section).

Any time you apply a +1 that is modifying the characteristic.

Does lash say that it reduces the base characteristic? If not, and a +1 attack modifies the Characteristic so that the new characteristic is +1 or +2 etc... over the base characteristic.

It is the same with Daemons and the +3 LD when casting psychic powers within something that says they are at -3 to their LD (Like SitW). They would end up with LD9 +3 -3=9 (Not LD9 +3 (capped at 10) -3=7) the red text is not correct.

And while you are at it, explain why Smash Attack worked the way it did last edition.

Last edition? not very familiar with smash in 6th. So I can not comment.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


The floor is only applicable after the calculation is finished.

Correct.
And the calculation of the Attacks characteristic is finished. Therefore the floor is applied, as I've proven.

Not at all finished, you have the rule about launching an assault that adds 1 to the Attacks Characteristic and as such needs to be added before you cap the characteristic.

Dr - you made a leap there, and ignored the rules quote from Rigeld that proved otherwise.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


The floor is only applicable after the calculation is finished.

Correct.
And the calculation of the Attacks characteristic is finished. Therefore the floor is applied, as I've proven.

Not at all finished, you have the rule about launching an assault that adds 1 to the Attacks Characteristic and as such needs to be added before you cap the characteristic.

Address the second half of my post please. It proves you wrong with rules quotes.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Dr - you made a leap there, and ignored the rules quote from Rigeld that proved otherwise.

No leap, the rules I posted say that two weapons add +1 attack, this applies to the characteristic because of the rules for modifiers.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Rule wise:
"Number of Attacks
Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks: "

Underlined the emphasis that the bonus attacks are not part of the characteristic.

"• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.

• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each." (The Assault Phase chapter, Number of Attacks section).

Each give +1 attack. They are also special rules that modify a characteristic, so lowering the characteristic would take bonuses into account as bonuses add to the characteristic.

I underlined your assumption that has no rules support. Given the other quote, bonus attacks do not modify the characteristic, they modify the number of attacks.

It is not an assumption. Bonus attacks are modifiers. Base characteristics can be modified.

Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)." (Models & Units chapter, Modifiers section).

+1 Attack is a modifier to the characteristic.

The characteristic is being modified, your claims are not true.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Rule wise:
"Number of Attacks
Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks: "

Underlined the emphasis that the bonus attacks are not part of the characteristic.

"• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.

• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each." (The Assault Phase chapter, Number of Attacks section).

Each give +1 attack. They are also special rules that modify a characteristic, so lowering the characteristic would take bonuses into account as bonuses add to the characteristic.

I underlined your assumption that has no rules support. Given the other quote, bonus attacks do not modify the characteristic, they modify the number of attacks.

It is not an assumption. Bonus attacks are modifiers. Base characteristics can be modified.

Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)." (Models & Units chapter, Modifiers section).

+1 Attack is a modifier to the characteristic.

The characteristic is being modified, your claims are not true.

Please explain why the actual rules for number of attacks separate the two (Attacks characteristic vs bonus attacks). Please cite relevant rules because the rules I've cited disagree.

I am not an editor or writer, so I have no idea why they made that distinction.

The rules are clear though.

+1 attack is a modifier (Agreed)?

Modifiers modify characteristics (Agreed)?

If so then there is not debate to be had.

 DeathReaper wrote:
I am not an editor or writer, so I have no idea why they made that distinction.

So you have no rules saying that the bonus attacks modify the characteristic rather than (what the actual rules say) the fact that they add to the number of attacks?

Cool story bro. Come back with rules support.

There is also an additional portion of the Lasher Tendril rule:

"For example, if a model is in base contact with two Maulerfiends, each of which has two sets of lasher tendrils, he has 4 fewer Attacks."

Attacks and Attacks characteristic are interchangeable with regards to modifiers within the rule for the item itself.

Angelic wrote:
There is also an additional portion of the Lasher Tendril rule:

"For example, if a model is in base contact with two Maulerfiends, each of which has two sets of lasher tendrils, he has 4 fewer Attacks."

Attacks and Attacks characteristic are interchangeable with regards to modifiers within the rule for the item itself.

Examples, by definition, aren't rules.
And that still holds true - Attacks (capitalized) is the characteristic. That is the basis of the number of attacks, but not the entirety.

rigeld2 wrote:

Attacks (capitalized) is the characteristic.

"+1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn."

"+1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack."

"Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks."

Angelic wrote:
There is also an additional portion of the Lasher Tendril rule:
Attacks and Attacks characteristic are interchangeable with regards to modifiers within the rule for the item itself.

Citation? There's no RAW quote for that interchange-ability. Attacks is a characteristic, the number of attacks you get is dependent on your base Attacks characteristic, PLUS bonus attacks as I quoted.

Also "Attacks" and "attacks" are different. Do you think lashwhips remove hammer of wrath attacks too? It's a bonus attack. Does that mean if a walker charges you and only has "1 Attack" that the HoW hits with no bonuses and he then just chills without using his main powerfist or his second powerfist? I would hope you see that is absurd, but some people really want to read things in their favor (not accusing you specifically).

The main issue is you have not addressed the specific quoted rule with a specific counter quote. We'll all assume its because there isn't one.

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:

Citation? There's no RAW quote for that interchange-ability.

I quoted it. The rule itself says it modifies Attacks characteristic and then gives an example using Attacks, also within the rule.

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:
We'll all assume its because there isn't one.

You shouldn't assume.

The for mentioned black Templar with 3 attacks on the charge would be at 1 attack after applying the -2 from dual tendrils. Otherwise what's the point of tendrils at all.

Lungpickle wrote:
The for mentioned black Templar with 3 attacks on the charge would be at 1 attack after applying the -2 from dual tendrils. Otherwise what's the point of tendrils at all.

Consider the following three units, an assault marine with 1 A, a CM with 2CCW and a Jetpack with base 4A a vanguard vet with 2 CCW and 2 base attacks.

An assault marine jump packing into CCW would get:
1 base Attacks characteristic attacks
+1 bonus attacks for dual CCW.
+1 bonus attacks from Hammer of Wrath.
+1 bonus attacks from charging.
= 4 attacks including HoW.

A VanVet would get 2+3=5 and a CM 4+3=7

The Attacks characteristic get reduced by one from a lash whip (note the word characteristic and the capital A).
Against 1 lash whip, the Assault marine is unaffected, the vanguard vet loses an aattack and the CM loses 1. If there are more than 1 lash whip in play, the Vanguard vet is unaffected and the CM can be reduced to 1+3=4.

If you want to say that it reduces little "a" attacks instead of the Attacks characteristic, please quote the relevant portion of the lashwhip rule in full please. The quote I've seen is:
"Each set of lasher tendrils reduces the Attacks characteristics of every model (friend and foe) in base contact with the bearer by 1 (to a minimum of 1) whilst they remain in base contact. The effects of multiple sets are cumulative. "
because that quote explicitly reduces the Attacks characteristic and the BRB says:
"Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks"

Bonus attacks are not part of the Attacks characteristic.




Also, is there anything that says it

Firstly to clear up a few things remember that multiplication is done before addition and that is why Smash worked the way it did in 6th. As for "Attacks Characteristic" being distinct from "bonus attacks" look at the actual rules:

"For example, if a model is in base contact with two Maulerfiends, each of which has two sets of lasher tendrils, he has 4 fewer Attacks."

So here we discover that what a lasher tendril modifies ~ Attacks.

"+1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn." 

" +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand get +1 Attack." 

"Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks."

This shows that those bonuses are the same thing, so we KNOW that lasher tendrils are modifying same thing as these "bonus attacks" and that they are therefore also modifying the "Attacks Characteristic".

So those marines are getting 1 attack RaW.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
I am not an editor or writer, so I have no idea why they made that distinction.

So you have no rules saying that the bonus attacks modify the characteristic rather than (what the actual rules say) the fact that they add to the number of attacks?

Cool story bro. Come back with rules support.

I have rules support, as FlingitNow and Angelic have pointed out, you are ignoring it, don't.

cleaned up my 1st post to include my personal interpretation

Angelic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Attacks (capitalized) is the characteristic.

"+1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn."

"+1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand get +1 Attack."

"Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks."

"For example, if a model is in base contact with two Maulerfiends, each of which has two sets of lasher tendrils, he has 4 fewer Attacks."

I find it hard to read it otherwise from this. The "Other Bonuses" Mentioned would be Tendrils, Rage, Black Mace etc...

As to reference to 6th Ed. , I used to run with it (Smash) but never got into the semantics of it. This time i've got enough relevant rules quotes above to side quite certainly with Angelic and DR.

6th edition Smash was explained in the FAQ and it was indeed because you divide/multiply before you add/substract Attacks.

Smash is a set value in 7th, so it's after dividing/multiplying and adding/substracting.

Doesn't the BRB make a distinction between base characteristics and characteristics? If you add Attacks, it doesn't stop being a characteristic.

By Raw, on Dakka as far as i've seen, even a "base characteristics" modifier is a "characteristics" modifier... Referring to Thunderwolves mounts discussion.

Angelic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Attacks (capitalized) is the characteristic.

"+1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn."

"+1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack."

"Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks."

Wow - it's like those rules were already posted and you managed to ignore context!
Oh, that's exactly what happened. The Attacks referred to there is number of Attacks in close combat. That's distinctly different from the Attacks characteristic - as specified in the rule I quoted.

Until you have an actual rule explaining that the distinction the rules make isn't relevant, you don't have an argument. Seriously - the rules say there's a difference between the Attacks characteristic and the bonus Attacks. Cite the rule (actual rule, not an assumption) that they're the same.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
I am not an editor or writer, so I have no idea why they made that distinction.

So you have no rules saying that the bonus attacks modify the characteristic rather than (what the actual rules say) the fact that they add to the number of attacks?

Cool story bro. Come back with rules support.

I have rules support, as FlingitNow and Angelic have pointed out, you are ignoring it, don't.

I've ignored nothing - don't take my lack of posting because I have a family as ignoring.
The "rules" cited prove nothing and don't address your basic problem that the rules I've cited make a distinction between the Attacks characteristic and bonus Attacks. Until you can address that you literally have no argument. Do Lasher Tendrils remove a Hammer of Wrath attack? Cite supporting rules with your answer.

In addition, Fling is on ignore for insulting and trolling me in the past, so don't bother referencing his posts.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Lasher tendrils rule wrote:Each set of lasher tendrils reduces the Attacks characteristics

They work on bonus attacks, why would they not?

Because that is not what the above quote from the rules say. You are not modifying attacks, you are modifying one part of what is used for calculating total number of attacks, which is the A characteristic.

The rest of your message omitted as it is incorrect.

Edit: Hmm, thought I responded to the latest, wonder why I wasn't shown more until after replying.

Reply by: Angelic - click to view full reply 

5315

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 15:42:41

Post by: Angelic

rigeld2 wrote:

Wow - it's like those rules were already posted and you managed to ignore context!
Oh, that's exactly what happened. The Attacks referred to there is number of Attacks in close combat. That's distinctly different from the Attacks characteristic - as specified in the rule I quoted.

Until you have an actual rule explaining that the distinction the rules make isn't relevant, you don't have an argument. Seriously - the rules say there's a difference between the Attacks characteristic and the bonus Attacks. Cite the rule (actual rule, not an assumption) that they're the same.

So, now that it's contrary to your position, Attacks (capitalized) is not referencing the characteristic? You've continually said that Attacks characteristic is not the same as attacks. The rule references a distinction between Attacks characteristic and attacks ( small a), not a distinction between Attacks characteristic and Attacks (capital A). So give me a rule that says Attacks characteristic is not the same as Attacks (capitalized). The rules for bonuses clearly state that they are +/- Attack (capitalized). I posted the rule again to tie it to what you specifically said.

Reply by: Lungpickle - click to view full reply 

60145

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 15:58:38

Post by: Lungpickle

I can't believe this evolved into an argument over big A and a little a. Lol add subtract multiply, add two from charging with 2 ccw and charge bonus. They have 1 attack if in base to base contact and two lasher tendrils. Then one attack in the following rounds since you cannot be modified below 1 attack.

My citation is in the rules. Read them again without skimming, or only seeing big A's or little a's.

Reply by: Happyjew - click to view full reply 

46128

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 16:16:33

Post by: Happyjew

Angelic, Fling, DR, etc. If a model with 1 Attack base were to be required to make an Attacks characteristic test, and the model has a pistol and CCW, does the model need a 1 or 2 to pass?

Reply by: RAWRAIrobblerobble - click to view full reply 

89616

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 16:36:58

Post by: RAWRAIrobblerobble

Lungpickle wrote:
I can't believe this evolved into an argument over big A and a little a. Lol add subtract multiply, add two from charging with 2 ccw and charge bonus. They have 1 attack if in base to base contact and two lasher tendrils. Then one attack in the following rounds since you cannot be modified below 1 attack.

My citation is in the rules. Read them again without skimming, or only seeing big A's or little a's.

Number of Attacks Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

As the BRB quote shows, bonus attacks are not part of the characteristics profile, so you can "Lol" what you like. Lasher whip effects modify the characteristic and, as worded, come before the comma in that sentence.

Reply by: blaktoof - click to view full reply 

15582

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 16:57:42

Post by: blaktoof

There are no such rules for changing characteristics other than modifiers.

as such attacks and attack characteristic are 100% interchangeable because there are no rules for a different meaning for one or the other within the game.

If anyone disagree with the above, please quote a rule to show otherwise.

Attacks (A)
This shows the number of times a model attacks during close combat. Most warriors and creatures have an Attacks characteristic of 1, so they will normally make one attack each in close combat, although some elite troops, monsters or heroes may be able to strike several times and have Attacks 2, Attacks 3 or more.

they are interchangeable from the RAW.


There are rules for how you handle multiple modifiers.

So you would not take the base attacks and modify them with lasher tendrils then apply any bonuses.

I agree with deathreaper, and others.

a reminder that arguments based on english and grammar are not viable in YMDC.

Reply by: clively - click to view full reply 

27004

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 17:01:25

Post by: clively

 Happyjew wrote:
Angelic, Fling, DR, etc. If a model with 1 Attack base were to be required to make an Attacks characteristic test, and the model has a pistol and CCW, does the model need a 1 or 2 to pass?

If such a mythical test existed we'd likely need to see the actual rule calling for it. Leadership tests are made against your leadership characteristic, but everywhere that asks for it states what modifiers to use. Initiative tests are fairly common, but, again may or may not have modifiers. In the case of a toughness test against a DE Reaver, I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone that said it needed to be against the riders T3 instead of the bikes T4.... Then again we have a rule telling us that when a model has more than one value for the same characteristic to use the higher one.

But this, like the idea of an Attack characteristic test, is beside the point.

--------------------

I think there are two ways of looking at this. First up is that either the part of the rule that used the word "characteristic" is wrong or the example given with the rule is wrong for not using it. It seems the safest bet is that the example given was intended whereas the rule just didn't capture it correctly.

Or, we need to identify the name of the thing that a characteristic which has been modified becomes. (Characteristic + Modifiers) = ??? Is it still the models "characteristic"? I think so.

Reply by: blaktoof - click to view full reply 

15582

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 17:10:10

Post by: blaktoof

 Happyjew wrote:
Angelic, Fling, DR, etc. If a model with 1 Attack base were to be required to make an Attacks characteristic test, and the model has a pistol and CCW, does the model need a 1 or 2 to pass?

if such a mythical test existed the answer would be 1 because you only get the +1 attack bonus from pistol/ccwpn when the model is engaged.

if the model was engaged the answer would be 2.

if the model was engaged and charging when this mythical test happened, the answer would be 3.

unless the test said to use the unmodified attacks characteristic.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 17:38:12

Post by: FlingitNow

 Happyjew wrote:
Angelic, Fling, DR, etc. If a model with 1 Attack base were to be required to make an Attacks characteristic test, and the model has a pistol and CCW, does the model need a 1 or 2 to pass?

Is the model making close combat attacks when he's required to take the test? If so then 2 otherwise of course 1.
Lets not get away from the fact the opposite position requires you to not read "+1 Attack" as +1 Attack...

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 17:44:48

Post by: DeathReaper

 Happyjew wrote:
Angelic, Fling, DR, etc. If a model with 1 Attack base were to be required to make an Attacks characteristic test, and the model has a pistol and CCW, does the model need a 1 or 2 to pass?

Is it in close combat?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

I've ignored nothing

It is clear from your posts that you have ignored that you gain +1 Attacks for having 2 ccw's. (Not +1 attacks)

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 18:53:19

Post by: FlingitNow

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:

Lungpickle wrote:
I can't believe this evolved into an argument over big A and a little a. Lol add subtract multiply, add two from charging with 2 ccw and charge bonus. They have 1 attack if in base to base contact and two lasher tendrils. Then one attack in the following rounds since you cannot be modified below 1 attack.

My citation is in the rules. Read them again without skimming, or only seeing big A's or little a's.

Number of Attacks Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

As the BRB quote shows, bonus attacks are not part of the characteristics profile, so you can "Lol" what you like. Lasher whip effects modify the characteristic and, as worded, come before the comma in that sentence.

That quote at best implies that the bonus attacks are not modifiers to the Attacks Characteristic. However when you look at each bonus attack they tell you that they are a +1 modifier to the Attacks Characteristic (written as +1 Attack).

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 20:16:21

Post by: rigeld2

Angelic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Wow - it's like those rules were already posted and you managed to ignore context!
Oh, that's exactly what happened. The Attacks referred to there is number of Attacks in close combat. That's distinctly different from the Attacks characteristic - as specified in the rule I quoted.

Until you have an actual rule explaining that the distinction the rules make isn't relevant, you don't have an argument. Seriously - the rules say there's a difference between the Attacks characteristic and the bonus Attacks. Cite the rule (actual rule, not an assumption) that they're the same.

So, now that it's contrary to your position, Attacks (capitalized) is not referencing the characteristic? You've continually said that Attacks characteristic is not the same as attacks.

*sigh*
Seriously, read the entire rules section and not just want you want to pretend it says.

Spoiler:

Number of Attacks

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.

So we see that - for a fact - there's a distinction between what's on the profile and what a bonus attack is. Agreed? ("attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks")
We also see that, regardless of capitalization, "the following" are "bonus attacks" and not the characteristic on the profile. Agreed? (same quote as above)

Since we know both of those, which we only know through reading the entire rule and not just portions of it we can see that, regardless of capitalization, bonus attacks are not the characteristic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

I've ignored nothing

It is clear from your posts that you have ignored that you gain +1 Attacks for having 2 ccw's. (Not +1 attacks)

Not true. You gain +1 bonus attack which is separate from the Attacks characteristic on your profile. Please cite a rule if you disagree.

In addition, you ignored my question. Please answer it. Heck, anyone in the "everything is an Attack characteristic" please answer it.

Do Lasher Tendrils remove a HoW attack? Please cite rules support for any answer you give. (It's a shame I have to type that last sentence)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:
There are no such rules for changing characteristics other than modifiers.

Correct! Fortunately, Number of Attacks isn't a characteristic so... irrelevant?

a reminder that arguments based on english and grammar are not viable in YMDC.

Not true.

Reply by: blaktoof - click to view full reply 

15582

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 20:35:58

Post by: blaktoof

Attacks (A)
This shows the number of times a model attacks during close combat. Most warriors and creatures have an Attacks characteristic of 1, so they will normally make one attack each in close combat, although some elite troops, monsters or heroes may be able to strike several times and have Attacks 2, Attacks 3 or more.

attacks=Attacks= attack characteristic. there is no difference. cite a rule showing there is.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 20:41:54

Post by: rigeld2

blaktoof wrote:

Attacks (A)
This shows the number of times a model attacks during close combat. Most warriors and creatures have an Attacks characteristic of 1, so they will normally make one attack each in close combat, although some elite troops, monsters or heroes may be able to strike several times and have Attacks 2, Attacks 3 or more.

attacks=Attacks= attack characteristic. there is no difference. cite a rule showing there is.

I have. It's in the spoiler above, and repeated a few other times in the thread. Perhaps you've read it?

Reply by: blaktoof - click to view full reply 

15582

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 20:52:43

Post by: blaktoof

your post doesn't actually show that the bonus attacks are not modifiers to the attack characteristic.

most likely because there are no actual rules for modifying a characteristic without it being a modifier.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 21:20:10

Post by: rigeld2

blaktoof wrote:
your post doesn't actually show that the bonus attacks are not modifiers to the attack characteristic.

Really? It doesn't include this?

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

Since I just copy and pasted it, I know for a fact your statement is incorrect.
You make a number of attacks equal to X + Y. X is the number on your profile. Y is not. Y modifies the number of attacks you made, not the number on your profile.

most likely because there are no actual rules for modifying a characteristic without it being a modifier.

Since I'm saying the characteristic is not modified in the rule I quoted, I'm guessing you agree with me?

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 21:39:37

Post by: DeathReaper

Except the Characteristic is modified, because that is how modifiers work.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively..." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section).

By definition, modifiers modify characteristics.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 21:41:05

Post by: rigeld2

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except the Characteristic is modified, because that is how modifiers work.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively..." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section).

By definition, modifiers modify characteristics.

No. By definition if a characteristic was changed, a modifier did so.

What you said, and what does not follow, is that every number change is a modifier and therefore modifies a characteristic.
If something that is *not* a characteristic is changed, it wasn't done so using the modifier rules.

Reply by: lessthanjeff - click to view full reply 

89221

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 21:42:46

Post by: lessthanjeff

 Grey Templar wrote:
According to PEMDAS, which GW appears to follow.

You would do addition first and then subtraction.

So yes, they would add up their attacks to 3 and then you would reduce those.

But IIRC 2 sets of lasher tendrils don't stack.

First off, the math teacher in me feels obligated to mention that pemdas does not say you do all the addition and then do all the subtraction. You actually do both operations at the same time reading from left to right. The same is also true of multiplication and division being done simultaneously. There are actually just 4 steps in the order of operations.

On topic, now I feel bad for starting most of this argument. I use maulerfiends all the time, but to me since the rule specifically states the characteristic it does not include the bonuses for weapons and charging. Part of my reasoning comes from why they included the word characteristic at all. I suspect if they just wanted it to affect the attacks with modifiers included then the rule would have simply said "reduce the number of attacks" instead. Similarly, when I'm told to take a strength test, I do not count the bonuses to my strength conferred from weapons.

Some people also asked what would be the point under the ruling as I interpreted it. As I read it, the rule really only affects the captains and commanders who have a higher base attack characteristic. It's not useless, but it's not really worth 10 points this way either.

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 21:49:56

Post by: DeathReaper

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except the Characteristic is modified, because that is how modifiers work.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively..." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section).

By definition, modifiers modify characteristics.

No. By definition if a characteristic was changed, a modifier did so.

What you said, and what does not follow, is that every number change is a modifier and therefore modifies a characteristic.
If something that is *not* a characteristic is changed, it wasn't done so using the modifier rules.

Well it is a good thing that Attacks is a characteristic, and it was changed in this case.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 21:55:28

Post by: rigeld2

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except the Characteristic is modified, because that is how modifiers work.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively..." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section).

By definition, modifiers modify characteristics.

No. By definition if a characteristic was changed, a modifier did so.

What you said, and what does not follow, is that every number change is a modifier and therefore modifies a characteristic.
If something that is *not* a characteristic is changed, it wasn't done so using the modifier rules.

Well it is a good thing that Attacks is a characteristic, and it was changed in this case.

Except it wasn't. As I've proven. Using actual, quoted rules.

Your turn.

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 21:56:37

Post by: DeathReaper

It actually is, As I have proven Using actual, quoted rules.

you have not proven anything as your rules quotes do not say what you think they say.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/18 22:05:23

Post by: rigeld2

 DeathReaper wrote:
It actually is, As I have proven Using actual, quoted rules.

you have not proven anything as your rules quotes do not say what you think they say.

Please, elaborate. In addition, answer the question I've posed twice so far. Also - which rules again? What argument have you made that I haven't addressed?

How does the following not make a distinction between bonus attacks and the Attacks characteristic profile?

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

The underlined is the Attacks characteristic.
The italics are a distinctly separate thing, called "bonus attacks" that are used to determine the "Number of attacks" (heading of the rule in question).

Explain where my statement is incorrect.

Reply by: blaktoof - click to view full reply 

15582

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 01:04:44

Post by: blaktoof

addition and subtraction happen at the same time.

anything that changes the attacks of the attack characteristic to a final value of an attack characteristic be it an addition, bonus, magical fairy love dust, +1 bonus for bringing beer, -2 for bringing crappy beer, is a modifier. As there is no other way to change a characteristic to any other value for any other purpose without using a modifier.

there are clear rules for how to apply modifiers, addition or subtraction happens at the same time.

so B is the only correct answer.

Reply by: RAWRAIrobblerobble - click to view full reply 

89616

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 01:17:48

Post by: RAWRAIrobblerobble

Except for 'A' which is the actual answer.

Hammer of Wrath, dual CCW, etc do NOT modify the Attacks characteristic, they are bonus attacks. Even if I had 10 attacks on my profile, I still get a hammer of wrath if I have the rule for it. The lashwhip rule explicitly modifies the Attacks characteristics, not the number of attacks.

The "example" text is fluff, not a rule. Otherwise under the shooting section people could say:

For example, if the firing model is a Space Marine with a Ballistic Skill of 4, a roll of 3 or more would score a hit.

So by your view, does a Space Marine always hits on a 3, regardless of modifiers? It's a set value. It says so right in the example text.

Also, for any who want lash whips to eliminates all attacks and not just the base Attacks characteristic, what happen to hammer of wrath attacks?

Reply by: blaktoof - click to view full reply 

15582

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 01:21:32

Post by: blaktoof

HoW has nothing to do with a models attack characteristic.

dual CCW does modify the models attack characterstic, as does charging, etc.

anything which is changing the values of the models attacks is modifying the characteristic.

there are no rules for "bonuses" or "penalties" which are not modifiers, if there are please cite how you apply them.

or did the game designers take the time to write the modifiers section, the multiple modifiers, then make up a separate magical way to change characteristics called "bonuses" and put no rules in the game for how they work,


or bonuses = modifiers as they are adding/subtracting ie modifier.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 08:05:23

Post by: FlingitNow

rigeld2 615444 7213294 null wrote:

How does the following not make a distinction between bonus attacks and the Attacks characteristic profile?

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

How does it not? Well it's like if it said "Each engaged model strikes at a strength (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus any bonus from its weapon" would that sentence suddenly make the strength modifiers on weapons not modifiers? No it is just explaining that the number of attacks you make (which by definition is your attacks characteristic) is what is on your profile plus bonuses. Those bonuses are defined as modifiers (they each state +1 Attack).

The underlined is the Attacks characteristic.
The italics are a distinctly separate thing, called "bonus attacks" that are used to determine the "Number of attacks" (heading of the rule in question).

No the total number of attacks it makes is the attacks characteristic see the attacks characteristic definition. This total is made from the value on your profile plus the modifiers listed as that statement tells us.

Explain where my statement is incorrect.

As above plus it is dependent on "+1 Attack" /= "+1 Attack" which is such as MASSIVE flaw I'm shocked to see you're still claiming it.

Reply by: lessthanjeff - click to view full reply 

89221

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 09:59:11

Post by: lessthanjeff

blaktoof wrote:
HoW has nothing to do with a models attack characteristic.

dual CCW does modify the models attack characterstic, as does charging, etc.

anything which is changing the values of the models attacks is modifying the characteristic.

there are no rules for "bonuses" or "penalties" which are not modifiers, if there are please cite how you apply them.

or did the game designers take the time to write the modifiers section, the multiple modifiers, then make up a separate magical way to change characteristics called "bonuses" and put no rules in the game for how they work,


or bonuses = modifiers as they are adding/subtracting ie modifier.

I'm still not convinced by this. I think that when a modifier is supposed to affect the characteristic permanently it will say so as it does for giving a model a bike. In the bike case, the new vale would be used for toughness tests etc. Other modifiers like a frost sword give the model +1 strength but do not affect the characteristic and would not help the model taking a strength test. This is a case where it specifies affecting the characteristic on the model's profile and there definitely is a difference between giving a model a bike and giving a model a frost sword even though both are modifiers.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 10:32:38

Post by: FlingitNow

I'm still not convinced by this. I think that when a modifier is supposed to affect the characteristic permanently it will say so as it does for giving a model a bike. In the bike case, the new vale would be used for toughness tests etc. Other modifiers like a frost sword give the model +1 strength but do not affect the characteristic and would not help the model taking a strength test. This is a case where it specifies affecting the characteristic on the model's profile and there definitely is a difference between giving a model a bike and giving a model a frost sword even though both are modifiers.

However the strength modifier is still a modifier. Say you had an item that "reduced a model's strength characteristic by 3 to a minimum of 1". If you had a S3 model he would be S1, if you gave him a Frost Sword he'd still be S1, if you enfeeble him he'd still be S1, if you gave him a power maul he'd be S2.

That is how modifiers work. This is covered in multiple modifiers. This is how the lasher tendrils work too.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 11:33:26

Post by: rigeld2

blaktoof wrote:
HoW has nothing to do with a models attack characteristic.

But it's demonstrably a bonus attack, just like dual CCW.

dual CCW does modify the models attack characterstic, as does charging, etc.

The rules I've cited disagree.

Reply by: BlackTalos - click to view full reply 

81346

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 12:26:32

Post by: BlackTalos

rigeld2 wrote:
How does the following not make a distinction between bonus attacks and the Attacks characteristic profile?

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

The underlined is the Attacks characteristic.
The italics are a distinctly separate thing, called "bonus attacks" that are used to determine the "Number of attacks" (heading of the rule in question).

Explain where my statement is incorrect.

Rigeld, we know for one that Hammer of Wrath is a completely different attack, at a different I step, and un-related to the A characteristic.

Secondly, if you must really abide by your above argument, that the "bonus attacks" are completely independent to the Attacks characteristic profile, then following this rule:
"Additionally, when it makes its close combat attacks, it can choose instead to make a single Smash Attack."
Why would you suddenly ignore these "bonus attacks"? The above only talks about Attacks and close combat attacks, why is the "bonus attacks" of +1 +1 suddenly ignored?

Thirdly, the rule you quoted:

Spoiler:

Number of Attacks

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.

Where do the Tendrils Add/Remove Attacks? We know that "as indicated on its characteristics profile" is a set value, so the Tendrils are "Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks" But in this case, the "extra Attacks" are bonus Attacks of -1.

If you disagree with this third statement, then please explain to me which rules you are using to provide the enemy models with the number of attacks they are using?
Are you somehow modifying the value contained in "as indicated on its characteristics profile" in the Rule above? If so, which rule allows you to do so? It would have to specifically state that you are modifying the Profile of the model (Permanently? Should i cross out the "A" value and write a new one in my book every game?).

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 13:13:41

Post by: rigeld2

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
How does the following not make a distinction between bonus attacks and the Attacks characteristic profile?

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

The underlined is the Attacks characteristic.
The italics are a distinctly separate thing, called "bonus attacks" that are used to determine the "Number of attacks" (heading of the rule in question).

Explain where my statement is incorrect.

Rigeld, we know for one that Hammer of Wrath is a completely different attack, at a different I step, and un-related to the A characteristic.

I'll concede that the capitalization of attacks is irrelevant (referencing a prior post).
It must be, or HoW is absolutely related to the Attacks characteristic.

Secondly, if you must really abide by your above argument, that the "bonus attacks" are completely independent to the Attacks characteristic profile, then following this rule:
"Additionally, when it makes its close combat attacks, it can choose instead to make a single Smash Attack."
Why would you suddenly ignore these "bonus attacks"? The above only talks about Attacks and close combat attacks, why is the "bonus attacks" of +1 +1 suddenly ignored?

Because making multiple Smash attacks does not follow the Smash rule that tells you to make a single Smash attack.
It's literally right there in the rule you quoted.

Thirdly, the rule you quoted:

Spoiler:

Number of Attacks

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.

Where do the Tendrils Add/Remove Attacks? We know that "as indicated on its characteristics profile" is a set value, so the Tendrils are "Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks" But in this case, the "extra Attacks" are bonus Attacks of -1.

False. The Profile is not a set value - it's the number you start with. It's then modified by the Lasher Tendrils, as I've demonstrated.

If you disagree with this third statement, then please explain to me which rules you are using to provide the enemy models with the number of attacks they are using?

The Lasher Tendrils rules that specify they modify the characteristic of course. As I've said.

Are you somehow modifying the value contained in "as indicated on its characteristics profile" in the Rule above? If so, which rule allows you to do so? It would have to specifically state that you are modifying the Profile of the model (Permanently? Should i cross out the "A" value and write a new one in my book every game?).

Yes, I'm modifying the number on the characteristic profile as the Lasher Tendrils rule requires. It's not permanent as the Lasher Tendrils rule specifies while the model is in base contact.

Reply by: Angelic - click to view full reply 

5315

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 15:22:08

Post by: Angelic

It sets a bad precedent to say they are not characteristic modifiers. We then have no rules on how to apply them or in what order to apply them. Charge bonuses and CCW bonuses get added in then multiplied or added then divided, which ever is most advantageous. You would then deny the only rules support preventing such.

We do not have rules saying that such bonus attacks do not modify the characteristic. We ONLY have rules saying that they are separate from the model's "characteristic profile". In and of itself, it is an obvious statement that is not persuasive in prohibiting the bonuses from modifying the characteristic. We are given rules that say wargear, etc., modify characteristics. This means that we would need explicit statements to the contrary elsewhere. If lasher tendrils said "characteristic profile" then I would agree it doesn't do anything with a "1".

Reply by: RAWRAIrobblerobble - click to view full reply 

89616

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 16:29:11

Post by: RAWRAIrobblerobble

I think we can all agree that if the lasherwhips hadn't specifically said it modified the "Attacks characteristic" there would more of a RAW argument to be made. But it does say "characteristic" and we have explicit RAW stating HoW/2CCWs/etc are "bonus attacks" not modifiers to the Attacks characteristic. The affirmative position is based on english parsing and example (not RULE) text.

If I had lashwhips I'd want them to work too, but the RAW doesn't support it. I want my TFC to move and fire too, but its still a heavy(4) so RAW it can't, even if artillery in general can move and fire now and mine is modelled as a big bike.

Reply by: Angelic - click to view full reply 

5315

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 16:41:52

Post by: Angelic

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:
we have explicit RAW stating HoW/2CCWs/etc are "bonus attacks" not modifiers to the Attacks characteristic.

Absolutely not correct. We do not have explicit language that they are not modifiers to a characteristic. At most (though many disagree) you have implicit statements.

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 16:43:04

Post by: DeathReaper

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:
But it does say "characteristic" and we have explicit RAW stating HoW/2CCWs/etc are "bonus attacks" not modifiers to the Attacks characteristic. The affirmative position is based on english parsing and example (not RULE) text.

"bonus attacks" are modifiers to the Attacks characteristic.

Why do you think they are not?

"+1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus." (The Assault Phase chapter, Number of attacks section).

The charge bonus gives a modifier.

Why would you not apply that modifier to the Attacks Characteristic?

Reply by: RAWRAIrobblerobble - click to view full reply 

89616

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 17:31:39

Post by: RAWRAIrobblerobble

 DeathReaper wrote:

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:
But it does say "characteristic" and we have explicit RAW stating HoW/2CCWs/etc are "bonus attacks" not modifiers to the Attacks characteristic. The affirmative position is based on english parsing and example (not RULE) text.

"bonus attacks" are modifiers to the Attacks characteristic.

Why do you think they are not?

"+1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus." (The Assault Phase chapter, Number of attacks section).

The charge bonus gives a modifier.

Why would you not apply that modifier to the Attacks Characteristic?

Because they don't say they modify the characteristic.

If you are saying extra weapons modify my characteristic profile, that would mean my profile is changed, so if I have a CCW and pistol then my A characteristic goes up to 2, then I have 2 attacks even if I swing a different weapon - like a T hammer.

Where does it state that all modifiers to the number of attacks modifies the models base Attacks characteristic? Because we've quoted RAW where it says otherwise already. I'll even give you another example from the BRB:

If a Walker is armed with two or more Melee weapons, it gains +1 bonus Attack for each additional weapon after the first. Unlike other models, this is not limited to a single bonus Attack, so a Walker with three Melee weapons would have 2 bonus Attacks.

Bonus attacks. Not "bonus to its Attacks characteristic". Lash whips says "attacks characteristic" dual CCW/HoW/etc do not.

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 17:55:21

Post by: DeathReaper

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:


Because they don't say they modify the characteristic.

Incorrect.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively..." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section)

Wargear modifies the characteristic.

If you are saying extra weapons modify my characteristic profile, that would mean my profile is changed, so if I have a CCW and pistol then my A characteristic goes up to 2, then I have 2 attacks even if I swing a different weapon - like a T hammer.

Wargear does modify the characteristic, but only when you are using that wargear...

So it will have no effect on your Thammer example.

Where does it state that all modifiers to the number of attacks modifies the models base Attacks characteristic? Because we've quoted RAW where it says otherwise already. I'll even give you another example from the BRB:

If a Walker is armed with two or more Melee weapons, it gains +1 bonus Attack for each additional weapon after the first. Unlike other models, this is not limited to a single bonus Attack, so a Walker with three Melee weapons would have 2 bonus Attacks.

Bonus attacks. Not "bonus to its Attacks characteristic". Lash whips says "attacks characteristic" dual CCW/HoW/etc do not.

Where does it say that? in the quote I provided about modifiers.

A modifier is the only way to alter a characteristic. As such all modifiers modify the characteristic.

Bonus attacks are modifiers, and as such modify the characteristic.

If they do not then you do not get to roll any dice for those bonus attacks because "To determine whether hits are scored, roll a D6 for each Attack a model gets to make and compare the WS of the attacking model to the WS of the target unit." (The Assault Phase chapter, Roll to hit section).

Note this says "roll a D6 for each Attack a model gets to make" bonus attacks have to modify the characteristic or you would never roll any dice for them to see if they hit.

Luckily Bonus attacks for charging and two weapons each add +1 Attack, and as such modify the characteristic.

Reply by: RAWRAIrobblerobble - click to view full reply 

89616

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 18:41:14

Post by: RAWRAIrobblerobble

 DeathReaper wrote:

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:


Because they don't say they modify the characteristic.

Incorrect.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively..." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section)

Wargear modifies the characteristic.

We get that you want the lash whips to remove attacks.
We get that you want to believe that attacks and Attacks characteristic are the same thing.
We get that you want to equate "some" with "every" when it comes to modifiers.

"Certain" pieces are not all pieces. All cats are animals but not all animals are cats.
Lash whips says "Attacks characteristic". HoW/dualCCW don't.

Let's set that aside for a minute though. Let' also set aside that fact that charging for +1 bonus attack is not wargear for the moment.
Here's my questions to you:
1) What characteristic on a unit's profile does a lasgun modify? Which of STAIWLdSv does it modify?
2) How about a hand weapon (on a model without a pistol)? Which of STAIWLdSv does it modify?


If those pieces of gear don't modify base characteristics, why do you insist HoW and other rules (dual ccw, etc ) do when they never use the word "characteristic"? Only lash whips says they modify the characteristic.

Reply by: Happyjew - click to view full reply 

46128

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 18:58:56

Post by: Happyjew

 DeathReaper wrote:
As such all modifiers modify the characteristic.

So what characteristic does Stealth and Shrouded modify?

What about the Grimoire of True Names?

Or how about the Acrobatic special rule (from Codex Eldar)?

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 19:07:47

Post by: DeathReaper

 Happyjew wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
As such all modifiers modify the characteristic.

So what characteristic does Stealth and Shrouded modify?

What about the Grimoire of True Names?

Or how about the Acrobatic special rule (from Codex Eldar)?

Please do not take what I said out of context.

I was talking about modifiers to one of the 9 characteristics.

Stealth modifies cover saves which is not a characteristic.

Not familiar with the Grimoire of True Names or the Acrobatic special rule, so I can not comment on them, but it is probably the same as above, I was talking about modifiers to one of the 9 characteristics (The Attacks Characteristic to be exact), not modifiers in general.

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:
We get that you want the lash whips to remove attacks.

Actually I neither play with or against them, so I don't really care either way. I do want to get the rules correct though if I ever do encounter one.

P.S. Please do not assign bias where there is none, it weakens your argument.

We get that you want to believe that attacks and Attacks characteristic are the same thing.

Attacks come from the Attacks characteristic in CC, so yes they are the same as far as the RAW goes, not sure what you are getting at here.

P.S. Please do not assign bias where there is none, it weakens your argument.

We get that you want to equate "some" with "every" when it comes to modifiers.

Some wargear increases characteristics, some wargear does not increase characteristics.

For example a force Axe increases the Str characteristic of the model using it by +2 when he uses it to strike blows in CC.

However Searchlights do not modify any characteristics.

Some modify characteristics, like having two weapons or launching an assault, and some do not, like searchlights...

P.S. do not take my posts out of context. If you do not ignore the context you would see that I was specifically talking about modifiers to one of the 9 characteristics (The Attacks Characteristic to be exact), not modifiers in general.

"Certain" pieces are not all pieces. All cats are animals but not all animals are cats.

And all wargear does not modify characteristics, as I pointed out above.

Lash whips says "Attacks characteristic". HoW/dualCCW don't.

Irrelevant, Attacks is the Attacks Characteristic...

"Attacks (A)
This shows the number of times a model attacks during close combat. Most warriors and creatures have an Attacks characteristic of 1, so they will normally make one attack each in close combat, although some elite troops, monsters or heroes may be able to strike several times and have Attacks 2, Attacks 3 or more." (Models and Units chapter, Attacks section).

The Attacks Characteristic is linked with how many attacks a model can make in CC...

Let's set that aside for a minute though. Let' also set aside that fact that charging for +1 bonus attack is not wargear for the moment.
Here's my questions to you:
1) What characteristic on a unit's profile does a lasgun modify? Which of STAIWLdSv does it modify?

A lasgun does not modify a characteristic, it is a shooting weapon and has its own profile. See above about how not all wargear modifies characteristic.

2) How about a hand weapon (on a model without a pistol)? Which of STAIWLdSv does it modify?

A single CCW will not modify any characteristics, two CCW's though will modify the Attacks Characteristic by +1. See above about how not all wargear modifies characteristic.

If those pieces of gear don't modify base characteristics, why do you insist HoW and other rules (dual ccw, etc ) do when they never use the word "characteristic"? Only lash whips says they modify the characteristic.

Why would something that does not give a +1 to a stat modify a characteristic?

I never said Hammer of Wrath modified a Characteristic.

Something that gives +1 Str or +1 Toughness, or +1 Attacks demonstrably do modify the characteristic though.

Reply by: lessthanjeff - click to view full reply 

89221

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 19:38:45

Post by: lessthanjeff

 FlingitNow wrote:

I'm still not convinced by this. I think that when a modifier is supposed to affect the characteristic permanently it will say so as it does for giving a model a bike. In the bike case, the new vale would be used for toughness tests etc. Other modifiers like a frost sword give the model +1 strength but do not affect the characteristic and would not help the model taking a strength test. This is a case where it specifies affecting the characteristic on the model's profile and there definitely is a difference between giving a model a bike and giving a model a frost sword even though both are modifiers.

However the strength modifier is still a modifier. Say you had an item that "reduced a model's strength characteristic by 3 to a minimum of 1". If you had a S3 model he would be S1, if you gave him a Frost Sword he'd still be S1, if you enfeeble him he'd still be S1, if you gave him a power maul he'd be S2.

That is how modifiers work. This is covered in multiple modifiers. This is how the lasher tendrils work too.

See, I would disagree with that assessment too. If a spell specified that it reduced his strength characteristic and not just his strength, I think his profile strength value would become 1 and then the weapon would bring him up to 2 for determining to wound rolls etc. Similarly, if he was brought to strength 1 and had furious charge instead of a weapon I believe he'd end up at 2.

I think some modifiers affect the actual characteristic of a model, like a bike, while most do not, like a frost sword.

I'm not arguing that these objects aren't modifiers, I just believe there is a difference between the strength or attacks characteristic shown on a character's profile and the strength or number of attacks he strikes at while in combat.

Reply by: RAWRAIrobblerobble - click to view full reply 

89616

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 19:57:22

Post by: RAWRAIrobblerobble

 lessthanjeff wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

I'm still not convinced by this. I think that when a modifier is supposed to affect the characteristic permanently it will say so as it does for giving a model a bike. In the bike case, the new vale would be used for toughness tests etc. Other modifiers like a frost sword give the model +1 strength but do not affect the characteristic and would not help the model taking a strength test. This is a case where it specifies affecting the characteristic on the model's profile and there definitely is a difference between giving a model a bike and giving a model a frost sword even though both are modifiers.

However the strength modifier is still a modifier. Say you had an item that "reduced a model's strength characteristic by 3 to a minimum of 1". If you had a S3 model he would be S1, if you gave him a Frost Sword he'd still be S1, if you enfeeble him he'd still be S1, if you gave him a power maul he'd be S2.

That is how modifiers work. This is covered in multiple modifiers. This is how the lasher tendrils work too.

See, I would disagree with that assessment too. If a spell specified that it reduced his strength characteristic and not just his strength, I think his profile strength value would become 1 and then the weapon would bring him up to 2 for determining to wound rolls etc. Similarly, if he was brought to strength 1 and had furious charge instead of a weapon I believe he'd end up at 2.

I think some modifiers affect the actual characteristic of a model, like a bike, while most do not, like a frost sword.

I'm not arguing that these objects aren't modifiers, I just believe there is a difference between the strength or attacks characteristic shown on a character's profile and the strength or number of attacks he strikes at while in combat.

Excellent point on Furious Charge lessthanjeff. If a spell reduced me to S1, I'd still swing at (1)+1FC=2 for a Strength 2 attack if I have the Furious charge rule, even though both are modifiers.

EDIT: Actually scratch that, Furious charge modifies the Characteristic:

+1 to its Strength characteristic

so it fails for the same reason lash whips does.

but if I had a power maul or axes, those are resolved at S+2 or S+1, they do not modify the S characteristic. So they occur "outside" the parenthesis.

The Pro Lash whip argument is that lashwhips modify the number outside of the parenthesis. I believe this is false as it specifically states it reduces the "Attacks characteristic".

Number of Attacks
Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks

The wording in the attacks section specifically phrases it as if you get:
(Attacks Characteristic) attacks, plus bonus attacks. Specifically enumerated examples of bonus attacks are "+1 for charging and +1 for dual CCW.

The wording in the quote above does NOT support the pro lash whip position. The similar quote form the walker assault section supports this wording further:

If a Walker is armed with two or more Melee weapons, it gains +1 bonus Attack for each additional weapon after the first. Unlike other models, this is not limited to a single bonus Attack, so a Walker with three Melee weapons would have 2 bonus Attacks.

Again they are specifically stated to be bonus attacks, not bonuses to the attacks CHARACTERISTIC.

Lash whips can reduce the attack characteristic all it wants, the foe still gets the minimum of 1 from the modified Attacks Characteristic, a bonus attack for charging if they charged and another bonus attack if they have 2 CCW.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 20:05:23

Post by: FlingitNow

We get that you want to believe that attacks and Attacks characteristic are the same thing. 

Oh dear did you really type that? Absolutely by definition Attacks is referring to the attacks characteristic. How you can claim different is frankly laughable. What next? Strength is different to the strength characteristic? +1 is not adding 1?

You have just destroyed your own argument.

Reply by: lessthanjeff - click to view full reply 

89221

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 20:17:32

Post by: lessthanjeff

 FlingitNow wrote:

We get that you want to believe that attacks and Attacks characteristic are the same thing. 

Oh dear did you really type that? Absolutely by definition Attacks is referring to the attacks characteristic. How you can claim different is frankly laughable. What next? Strength is different to the strength characteristic? +1 is not adding 1?

You have just destroyed your own argument.

I would disagree with those being the same thing as well and I think it is an important distinction. For example, I see the strength characteristic as the value I would use if I was told to make an unmodified roll or check of a characteristic and I would separate that from the strength my model actually attacks at with bonuses from a weapon or something else.

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 20:22:12

Post by: DeathReaper

 lessthanjeff wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

We get that you want to believe that attacks and Attacks characteristic are the same thing. 

Oh dear did you really type that? Absolutely by definition Attacks is referring to the attacks characteristic. How you can claim different is frankly laughable. What next? Strength is different to the strength characteristic? +1 is not adding 1?

You have just destroyed your own argument.

I would disagree with those being the same thing as well and I think it is an important distinction. For example, I see the strength characteristic as the value I would use if I was told to make an unmodified roll or check of a characteristic and I would separate that from the strength my model actually attacks at with bonuses from a weapon or something else.

+1 Attack adds to the characteristic because a +1 Attack is a modifier, and modifiers, in this situation, add to the characteristic.

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:

Again they are specifically stated to be bonus attacks, not bonuses to the attacks CHARACTERISTIC.

Bonus Attacks add to the characteristic in the same was a power axe adds to the characteristic when using that weapon.

Therefore your assessment is incorrect.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 20:26:46

Post by: FlingitNow

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:

 lessthanjeff wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

I'm still not convinced by this. I think that when a modifier is supposed to affect the characteristic permanently it will say so as it does for giving a model a bike. In the bike case, the new vale would be used for toughness tests etc. Other modifiers like a frost sword give the model +1 strength but do not affect the characteristic and would not help the model taking a strength test. This is a case where it specifies affecting the characteristic on the model's profile and there definitely is a difference between giving a model a bike and giving a model a frost sword even though both are modifiers.

However the strength modifier is still a modifier. Say you had an item that "reduced a model's strength characteristic by 3 to a minimum of 1". If you had a S3 model he would be S1, if you gave him a Frost Sword he'd still be S1, if you enfeeble him he'd still be S1, if you gave him a power maul he'd be S2.

That is how modifiers work. This is covered in multiple modifiers. This is how the lasher tendrils work too.

See, I would disagree with that assessment too. If a spell specified that it reduced his strength characteristic and not just his strength, I think his profile strength value would become 1 and then the weapon would bring him up to 2 for determining to wound rolls etc. Similarly, if he was brought to strength 1 and had furious charge instead of a weapon I believe he'd end up at 2.

I think some modifiers affect the actual characteristic of a model, like a bike, while most do not, like a frost sword.

I'm not arguing that these objects aren't modifiers, I just believe there is a difference between the strength or attacks characteristic shown on a character's profile and the strength or number of attacks he strikes at while in combat.

Excellent point on Furious Charge lessthanjeff. If a spell reduced me to S1, I'd still swing at (1)+1FC=2 for a Strength 2 attack if I have the Furious charge rule, even though both are modifiers.

No some modifiers are permanent like a bike some are conditional like a weapon. Permanent modifiers are always active, conditional modifiers are only active at certain times. You do not apply multiple modifiers in the order they become active but instead in the PEDMAS order as described under multiple modifiers. Those two different types of modifier are still both modifiers so are treated the same and both follow the rules for multiple modifiers.

EDIT: Actually scratch that, Furious charge modifies the Characteristic:

+1 to its Strength characteristic

so it fails for the same reason lash whips does.

but if I had a power maul or axes, those are resolved at S+2 or S+1, they do not modify the S characteristic. So they occur "outside" the parenthesis.

The Pro Lash whip argument is that lashwhips modify the number outside of the parenthesis. I believe this is false as it specifically states it reduces the "Attacks characteristic".

There are not 2 of each characteristic (those inside and outside the patentheses) there is only a base stat and modifiers. Unless you have a rule stating there are 2 types of modifier and they are each treated separately for multiple modifiers? Because no such rule exists. The "bonus attacks" that you desperately want to be different from attack modifiers are not because they each tell you that they are "+1 Attack" and what is "+1 Attack"? Oh yes it is a modifier to the Attacks characteristic.

Number of Attacks
Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks

The wording in the attacks section specifically phrases it as if you get:
(Attacks Characteristic) attacks, plus bonus attacks. Specifically enumerated examples of bonus attacks are "+1 for charging and +1 for dual CCW.

It actually completely supports our position that your attacks (numver of attacks you make in combat) is your characteristic plus modifiers. It then goes on to tell each bonus is a modifier.

The wording in the quote above does NOT support the pro lash whip position. The similar quote form the walker assault section supports this wording further:

If a Walker is armed with two or more Melee weapons, it gains +1 bonus Attack for each additional weapon after the first. Unlike other models, this is not limited to a single bonus Attack, so a Walker with three Melee weapons would have 2 bonus Attacks.

Again they are specifically stated to be bonus attacks, not bonuses to the attacks CHARACTERISTIC.

Bonus attack is a modifier to the attacks characteristic RaW as proven many times now.

Lash whips can reduce the attack characteristic all it wants, the foe still gets the minimum of 1 from the modified Attacks Characteristic, a bonus attack for charging if they charged and another bonus attack if they have 2 CCW.

RaW this is absolutely 100% false. Please don't post things you know to be false like this statement it greatly weakens your argument.

Reply by: lessthanjeff - click to view full reply 

89221

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 20:49:37

Post by: lessthanjeff

 FlingitNow wrote:

It actually completely supports our position that your attacks (numver of attacks you make in combat) is your characteristic plus modifiers. It then goes on to tell each bonus is a modifier.

If the number of attacks the model makes and the attack characteristic are the exact same thing, then I don't think I see how the line on page 49 is supporting your argument. If they're the same they would be able to just say "make a number of attacks equal to your characteristic" because you're saying the modifiers already changed that value, right?

Also, the order of operations you guys are referring to does not say you do additions before you do subtractions. Just like PEMDAS in math, addition and subtraction are done at the exact same time. There are only 3 steps of modifiers being applied, first multiply, then add/subtract, then set values. Doesn't this cause another problem using your interpretation since the subtraction is not specified as having to come after the addition?

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 21:50:08

Post by: DeathReaper

 lessthanjeff wrote:

Also, the order of operations you guys are referring to does not say you do additions before you do subtractions. Just like PEMDAS in math, addition and subtraction are done at the exact same time. There are only 3 steps of modifiers being applied, first multiply, then add/subtract, then set values. Doesn't this cause another problem using your interpretation since the subtraction is not specified as having to come after the addition?

no because you do not stop mid calculation to check the limit since you do additions and subtractions at the same step.

A model has 2 attacks on its profile, -2 from maulerfieds wargear, +1 for charging, +1 for 2 weapons.

2-2 (=0) +1(=1)+1=2 (Check for minimum 1).

not 2 -2 (Set at minimum1) +1+1 =3

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 22:14:23

Post by: FlingitNow

If the number of attacks the model makes and the attack characteristic are the exact same thing, then I don't think I see how the line on page 49 is supporting your argument. If they're the same they would be able to just say "make a number of attacks equal to your characteristic" because you're saying the modifiers already changed that value, right? 

RaW definition for the attacks characteristic is that it is tge number of attacks you make. It is simply saying that this is worked out by taking the baseline and adding the following modifiers (the bonus attacks). The opposite position requires the number of attacks you make to not be your attacks characteristic contrary to the RaW definition of the attacks characteristic and that +1 Attack is not a modifier to the attacks characteristic contrary to the definition of modifiers.

Also, the order of operations you guys are referring to does not say you do additions before you do subtractions. Just like PEMDAS in math, addition and subtraction are done at the exact same time. There are only 3 steps of modifiers being applied, first multiply, then add/subtract, then set values. Doesn't this cause another problem using your interpretation since the subtraction is not specified as having to come after the addition?

I've never said addition comes before subtraction. They are done at the same time then you check for minimum 1 after completing the calculation.

Reply by: lessthanjeff - click to view full reply 

89221

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 23:06:40

Post by: lessthanjeff

Well I won't lie, I'd much rather have it run by ya'lls system than what I've been doing. Maybe I just have the old system of modifiers like bikes +1 to toughness too ingrained in my mind as not affecting things like instant death requirements.

When I'm uncertain about something, I do tend to lean towards the ruling that is less advantageous for me because I think people have a tendency to subconsciously support an interpretation in their own favor and I don't want to seem like I'm bending things to my advantage.

As a last question of clarification from how you guys play things then, a helfrost test on a model with a powerfist will treat him as strength 8 and only fail on a 6 then, right?

I still feel uneasy about things like that, and I hope they will clarify it in an faq, but I'll make sure we discuss and come to some agreement at the place I play. It never even seemed like an issue to me not to distinguish between the characteristic value and the modified value in play at a given time.

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/19 23:22:23

Post by: DeathReaper

 FlingitNow wrote:

If the number of attacks the model makes and the attack characteristic are the exact same thing, then I don't think I see how the line on page 49 is supporting your argument. If they're the same they would be able to just say "make a number of attacks equal to your characteristic" because you're saying the modifiers already changed that value, right? 

RaW definition for the attacks characteristic is that it is tge number of attacks you make. It is simply saying that this is worked out by taking the baseline and adding the following modifiers (the bonus attacks). The opposite position requires the number of attacks you make to not be your attacks characteristic contrary to the RaW definition of the attacks characteristic and that +1 Attack is not a modifier to the attacks characteristic contrary to the definition of modifiers.

(Emphasis mine).

100% this.
Specifically the underlined.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 01:40:34

Post by: rigeld2

 DeathReaper wrote:

+1 Attack adds to the characteristic because a +1 Attack is a modifier

Prove it. The actual rule doesn't add to a characteristic, it gives a bonus attack to the number of attacks.

Bonus Attacks add to the characteristic in the same was a power axe adds to the characteristic when using that weapon.

Therefore your assessment is incorrect.

Excellent. A Power Axe never adds to the Strength characteristic. It's Strength is equal to the weilder's + 2, but the weilder's Strength isn't modified.

You've asserted that every + is a modifier. You have failed to prove that, and Happy's questions were an attempt to demonstrate that.
Have you answered the question I've posed so many times now? Please do. It's absolutely relevant and your refusal to answer it is telling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

If the number of attacks the model makes and the attack characteristic are the exact same thing, then I don't think I see how the line on page 49 is supporting your argument. If they're the same they would be able to just say "make a number of attacks equal to your characteristic" because you're saying the modifiers already changed that value, right? 

RaW definition for the attacks characteristic is that it is tge number of attacks you make. It is simply saying that this is worked out by taking the baseline and adding the following modifiers (the bonus attacks). The opposite position requires the number of attacks you make to not be your attacks characteristic contrary to the RaW definition of the attacks characteristic and that +1 Attack is not a modifier to the attacks characteristic contrary to the definition of modifiers.

(Emphasis mine).

100% this.
Specifically the underlined.

Except that's not what the Number of Attacks rule says. So... No, it's not RAW.

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 01:50:07

Post by: DeathReaper

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

+1 Attack adds to the characteristic because a +1 Attack is a modifier

Prove it. The actual rule doesn't add to a characteristic, it gives a bonus attack to the number of attacks.

I have, but I have no issue quoting it again.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section)

The Modifiers section is the only place where we are given permission to apply bonuses (I.E. a +1 to Str or a +1 Attacks etc).

Either the bonus attacks are a modifier and you apply them to the characteristic

Or

Bonus attacks are not a modifier and have mo permission to apply them at all.

Either way you wind up with the same outcome when the Maulerfiend is involved.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Bonus Attacks add to the characteristic in the same was a power axe adds to the characteristic when using that weapon.

Therefore your assessment is incorrect.

Excellent. A Power Axe never adds to the Strength characteristic. It's Strength is equal to the weilder's + 2, but the weilder's Strength isn't modified.

I thought a Power Axe added a +1 to the users Str when making attacks. is this not the case?

It is the case, and the Power Axe is S +1...

"Many weapons (combat knives, maces, axes and other improvised or primitive weapons) don’t confer any Strength bonuses, AP values or special rules. These weapons are simply referred to as ‘close combat weapon’ in the model’s wargear and have the following
profile:" (Weapons chapter, Close Combat Weapons section).

Some CCW's don’t confer any Strength bonuses... The Power Axe however does confer a Str bonus...

Your argument is incorrect.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 02:02:51

Post by: rigeld2

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

+1 Attack adds to the characteristic because a +1 Attack is a modifier

Prove it. The actual rule doesn't add to a characteristic, it gives a bonus attack to the number of attacks.

I have, but I have no issue quoting it again.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section)

The Modifiers section is the only place where we are given permission to apply bonuses (I.E. a +1 to Str or a +1 Attacks etc).

So, just to clarify, every + anywhere in any rule must be adding to a characteristic?
So what characteristic do +'s to Deny the Witch dice modify? Cite rules.

Either the bonus attacks are a modifier and you apply them to the characteristic

Or

Bonus attacks are not a modifier and have mo permission to apply them at all.

Basic math proves you wrong.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Bonus Attacks add to the characteristic in the same was a power axe adds to the characteristic when using that weapon.

Therefore your assessment is incorrect.

Excellent. A Power Axe never adds to the Strength characteristic. It's Strength is equal to the weilder's + 2, but the weilder's Strength isn't modified.

I thought a Power Axe added a +1 to the users Str when making attacks. is this not the case?

It is the case, and the Power Axe is S +1...

"Many weapons (combat knives, maces, axes and other improvised or primitive weapons) don’t confer any Strength bonuses, AP values or special rules. These weapons are simply referred to as ‘close combat weapon’ in the model’s wargear and have the following
profile:" (Weapons chapter, Close Combat Weapons section).

Some CCW's don’t confer any Strength bonuses... The Power Axe however does confer a Str bonus...

Your argument is incorrect.

Wrong. Your argument would have a SM Librarian with a Force Axe making a Strength test on S5. The actual rules, however, clarify that it's the Strength of the weapons attacks, and not the user, that includes the bonus.

“If the weapon confers a Strength bonus, the Strength of the weapon’s attacks is equal to that of the user after any such modifiers have been applied.”

It's not a bonus to the characteristic, it's added to the characteristic to find the S of the weapon. Exactly like number of attacks.

Edit: Also, still dodging that HoW question? It's okay, I know you're doing so because you can't come up with an answer (citing rules) that supports your argument. So just admit that and I'll drop it.

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 02:17:01

Post by: DeathReaper

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

+1 Attack adds to the characteristic because a +1 Attack is a modifier

Prove it. The actual rule doesn't add to a characteristic, it gives a bonus attack to the number of attacks.

I have, but I have no issue quoting it again.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section)

The Modifiers section is the only place where we are given permission to apply bonuses (I.E. a +1 to Str or a +1 Attacks etc).

So, just to clarify, every + anywhere in any rule must be adding to a characteristic?
So what characteristic do +'s to Deny the Witch dice modify? Cite rules.

Waoh guy, don't put words in my mouth, I never said that...

Any + (Or - or x or ÷) that affects a characteristic is a modifier.

Not all +'s affect characteristics, but the ones that do are certainly and demonstrably affecting a characteristic.

rigeld2 wrote:

Either the bonus attacks are a modifier and you apply them to the characteristic

Or

Bonus attacks are not a modifier and have mo permission to apply them at all.

Basic math proves you wrong.

And how do you know to use basic math? The Modifiers section? so why are you referencing the rules for modifiers if you are claiming it is not a modifier? (If you are claiming it is not a modifier, that is what I got from your post).

Reply by: Happyjew - click to view full reply 

46128

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 02:27:16

Post by: Happyjew

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Either the bonus attacks are a modifier and you apply them to the characteristic

Or

Bonus attacks are not a modifier and have mo permission to apply them at all.

Basic math proves you wrong.

And how do you know to use basic math? The Modifiers section? so why are you referencing the rules for modifiers if you are claiming it is not a modifier? (If you are claiming it is not a modifier, that is what I got from your post).

Or, like Stealth or Shrouded, they modify something that is not a characteristic, such as the number of attacks you make in close combat.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 07:00:21

Post by: FlingitNow

Or, like Stealth or Shrouded, they modify something that is not a characteristic, such as the number of attacks you make in close combat.

RaW disagrees that the number of attacks you make in combat is not a characteristic:

BrB page8 wrote:ATTACKS
This shows the number of times a model attacks during close combat.

So anyone arguing that "number of attacks made in combat" /= Attacks characteristic is not arguing RaW.

Also anyone arguing that the bonus attacks are not modifiers are not arguing RaW as they state that they are as DeathReaper has shown:

BrB page8 wrote: Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.).

BrB page49 wrote: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn.

So we know we have a modifier to a characteristic. Further proof comes from the sentence above on page 49:

"Each engaged makes makes a number of attacks (A)" this part of the sentence is defining what your attacks characteristic A is note how it is the same as above: "as indicated on its profile, plus the following bonus attacks:" this tells us how to calculate the value by taking the number on the profile and adding the modifiers that follow once again PROVING that the bonus attacks are modifiers.

So all the RaW agrees they are modifiers to the attacks characteristic. To believe they are not means you believe that the BrB is lying when it defines the attacks characteristic, is wrong when it defines multiple modifiers, is making a new definition of number of attacks you make in close combat on page 49 that whilst identical to page 8 means something entirely different, that when they put +1 attack they don't mean +1 attack. Sorry but if your interpretation disagrees with every single written word on the subject you are on very shaky ground.

As a last question of clarification from how you guys play things then, a helfrost test on a model with a powerfist will treat him as strength 8 and only fail on a 6 then, right?

Why would it? It appears like you are trolling now as this was already covered. For the record I don't play Chaos and if I did I wouldn't take lasher tendrils as AV12 walkers are too easy to kill. As for the question once again that is a conditional modifier that only applies when the model is striking blows with that weapon. Is the model striking blows with the weapon when taking the Hellfrost test? Just like it was when some one asked about the attacks characteristic test.

Reply by: RAWRAIrobblerobble - click to view full reply 

89616

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 10:23:13

Post by: RAWRAIrobblerobble

Number of Attacks
Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:
• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.
For example, a unit of five Orks with two Melee weapons rolls fifteen dice (2 Attacks on their profile +1 for two weapons = 3 each). If they were charging, however, they would roll twenty (2 Attacks on their profile +1 for charging +1 for two weapons = 4 each!).

Is the attacks characteristic part of their profile? Yes.
Does Lash whips EXPLICITLY say it modifies the attacks characteristic? Yes.
Does Lash Whips say it modifies bonus attacks? No.

You keep saying you have proven it "RAW", but you haven't actually proven it. Your opinion is noted and if that is HYWPI that's fine too. You have offered no concise counterpoint to the quotes repeatedly offered from "Number of Attacks" and instead offer a disjointed interpretation spliced from multiple sections to try and read it differently for reasons no one with a different view from you seems to understand. It's not just that we don't agree, we don't even know what the basis for your claims are. That's why you get questions regarding the Strength modifiers.

Personally, if I'm asked what the "Number of Attacks" I have is and how it is calculated, I'm going to use the "Number of Attacks" section, not some hodgepodge of sentence fragments, selective quoting, "English parsing" and equivocation. If you want to have the last word and go on with what seems to amount to a "Can too, can not, CAN TOO" feel free, but don't take a lack of further rebuttals from others as acceptance of your opinion.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 11:03:44

Post by: FlingitNow

Is the attacks characteristic part of their profile? Yes. 
Does Lash whips EXPLICITLY say it modifies the attacks characteristic? Yes. 
Does Lash Whips say it modifies bonus attacks? No. 

Do bonus attacks modify the number of attacks you make in combat?

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 14:33:49

Post by: rigeld2

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

+1 Attack adds to the characteristic because a +1 Attack is a modifier

Prove it. The actual rule doesn't add to a characteristic, it gives a bonus attack to the number of attacks.

I have, but I have no issue quoting it again.

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model’s characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.), multiplying it (×2, ×3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)." (Models and Units chapter, Modifiers section)

The Modifiers section is the only place where we are given permission to apply bonuses (I.E. a +1 to Str or a +1 Attacks etc).

So, just to clarify, every + anywhere in any rule must be adding to a characteristic?
So what characteristic do +'s to Deny the Witch dice modify? Cite rules.

Waoh guy, don't put words in my mouth, I never said that...

So prove that +1 Attack is a modifier. Quoting the modifier rules doesn't do that (which is what you'd did) unless you're asserting that Attack always refers to characteristics. In you believe that, please read HoW and explain your stance in reference to that.

rigeld2 wrote:

Either the bonus attacks are a modifier and you apply them to the characteristic

Or

Bonus attacks are not a modifier and have mo permission to apply them at all.

Basic math proves you wrong.

And how do you know to use basic math? The Modifiers section? so why are you referencing the rules for modifiers if you are claiming it is not a modifier? (If you are claiming it is not a modifier, that is what I got from your post).

I'm not referencing the rules for modifiers. The + sign is basic math.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 15:58:48

Post by: FlingitNow

So prove that +1 Attack is a modifier. Quoting the modifier rules doesn't do that (which is what you'd did) unless you're asserting that Attack always refers to characteristics. In you believe that, please read HoW and explain your stance in reference to that. 

Does it modify the number of attacks a model makes in close combat?

Reply by: DeathReaper - click to view full reply 

31450

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 16:37:42

Post by: DeathReaper

 FlingitNow wrote:

So prove that +1 Attack is a modifier. Quoting the modifier rules doesn't do that (which is what you'd did) unless you're asserting that Attack always refers to characteristics. In you believe that, please read HoW and explain your stance in reference to that. 

Does it modify the number of attacks a model makes in close combat?

Yes.

Ergo the +1 attack from two CCW's is in fact a modifier.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/20 20:54:49

Post by: FlingitNow

 DeathReaper wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

So prove that +1 Attack is a modifier. Quoting the modifier rules doesn't do that (which is what you'd did) unless you're asserting that Attack always refers to characteristics. In you believe that, please read HoW and explain your stance in reference to that. 

Does it modify the number of attacks a model makes in close combat?

Yes.

Ergo the +1 attack from two CCW's is in fact a modifier.

Do you think the penny has dropped that something that modifies the attacks characteristic is a characteristic modifier?

Reply by: blaktoof - click to view full reply 

15582

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/21 00:20:52

Post by: blaktoof

There. Are no rules.for.changing characteristics without using modifiers...so yes its a modifier

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 01:13:59

Post by: rigeld2

blaktoof wrote:
There. Are no rules.for.changing characteristics without using modifiers...so yes its a modifier

So characteristics are defined in the Assault Phase section?

I'm not claiming to change a characteristic without a modifier. Again, please don't put words in my mouth.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 08:46:53

Post by: FlingitNow

rigeld2 wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
There. Are no rules.for.changing characteristics without using modifiers...so yes its a modifier

So characteristics are defined in the Assault Phase section?

I'm not claiming to change a characteristic without a modifier. Again, please don't put words in my mouth.

Do bonus attacks modify the number of times a model attacks in close combat? Simple yes/no will do.

Reply by: BlackTalos - click to view full reply 

81346

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 09:17:01

Post by: BlackTalos

Sorry for going back in Quotes but i feel the discussion hasn't moved forward by much. Still relevant.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
How does the following not make a distinction between bonus attacks and the Attacks characteristic profile?

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

The underlined is the Attacks characteristic.
The italics are a distinctly separate thing, called "bonus attacks" that are used to determine the "Number of attacks" (heading of the rule in question).

Explain where my statement is incorrect.

Rigeld, we know for one that Hammer of Wrath is a completely different attack, at a different I step, and un-related to the A characteristic.

I'll concede that the capitalization of attacks is irrelevant (referencing a prior post).
It must be, or HoW is absolutely related to the Attacks characteristic.

Hammer of Wrath is a separate attack, just like Mandiblasters or Soul Blaze. It is not a models' "Standard Attack" which makes use of the Attack Characteristic. The use of the word "Attack" is indeed misleading, and i could easily make the same connection: It is an "Attack" as such it is also affected: Old One Eye can only HoW 1 Attack against Lasher Tendrils... However i would like to point out "This Attack does not benefit from any of the model’s special rules (such as Furious Charge, Rending etc.)" As such i would think that "Lasher Tendrils" do not affect HoW. But i would point out yet again that this is a different, not really relevant subject. We are discussing Attacks and Modifiers, and as such i would keep HoW out of it...

rigeld2 wrote:

Secondly, if you must really abide by your above argument, that the "bonus attacks" are completely independent to the Attacks characteristic profile, then following this rule:
"Additionally, when it makes its close combat attacks, it can choose instead to make a single Smash Attack."
Why would you suddenly ignore these "bonus attacks"? The above only talks about Attacks and close combat attacks, why is the "bonus attacks" of +1 +1 suddenly ignored?

Because making multiple Smash attacks does not follow the Smash rule that tells you to make a single Smash attack.
It's literally right there in the rule you quoted.

I am not saying multiple Smash attacks, but a single Smash attack with bonus attacks seems to be part of your argument, as you are quite clearly stating that these bonuses are NOT Modifiers (and only Modifiers apply Set Values).
Why is a single Smash attack not 3 rolls To Hit? I apply the "bonus modifiers" after the Set Value of 1 Attack. Please explain how you apply a set value of (1) after bonus attacks if they are not within the "subtracting from it (–1, –2, etc.)" part that comes before "or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)"?

rigeld2 wrote:

Thirdly, the rule you quoted:

Spoiler:

Number of Attacks

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.

Where do the Tendrils Add/Remove Attacks? We know that "as indicated on its characteristics profile" is a set value, so the Tendrils are "Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks" But in this case, the "extra Attacks" are bonus Attacks of -1.

False. The Profile is not a set value - it's the number you start with. It's then modified by the Lasher Tendrils, as I've demonstrated.

If you disagree with this third statement, then please explain to me which rules you are using to provide the enemy models with the number of attacks they are using?

The Lasher Tendrils rules that specify they modify the characteristic of course. As I've said.

Are you somehow modifying the value contained in "as indicated on its characteristics profile" in the Rule above? If so, which rule allows you to do so? It would have to specifically state that you are modifying the Profile of the model (Permanently? Should i cross out the "A" value and write a new one in my book every game?).

Yes, I'm modifying the number on the characteristic profile as the Lasher Tendrils rule requires. It's not permanent as the Lasher Tendrils rule specifies while the model is in base contact.

"as indicated on its characteristics profile" IS a set value. It is the value that you read on a model's Codex. You never write a new profile during the game with affects on it. You always refer the the exact Number as is stated on the Codex, and apply Modifiers to it (per Modifiers Rule).
A Space Marine Veteran Sergeant will always have 2 Attacks on his characteristics profile that you can find in a Space Marine Codex. That value will not change during the course of the game, having a printed version of the Codex should not change values. A glitch on an digital codex could always happen...

In the Spoiler above, only:
• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.
Can modify a value that you read from the Codex.
Lasher Tendrils are part of "Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks."

Lasher Tendrils are just as much of a "bonus attack" than having 2CCW or Charge Bonus are.
Whether these are Attacks or attacks or aTtAcks, i don't think it would change the result of A(1)+1+1-2= 1 Attack. Even if i do agree with FlingItNow that Attacks are a defined term found throughout the BrB.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 13:04:46

Post by: rigeld2

 BlackTalos wrote:
Hammer of Wrath is a separate attack, just like Mandiblasters or Soul Blaze. It is not a models' "Standard Attack" which makes use of the Attack Characteristic. The use of the word "Attack" is indeed misleading, and i could easily make the same connection: It is an "Attack" as such it is also affected: Old One Eye can only HoW 1 Attack against Lasher Tendrils... However i would like to point out "This Attack does not benefit from any of the model’s special rules (such as Furious Charge, Rending etc.)" As such i would think that "Lasher Tendrils" do not affect HoW. But i would point out yet again that this is a different, not really relevant subject. We are discussing Attacks and Modifiers, and as such i would keep HoW out of it...

Your argument (and others) hinges on references to Attack being shorthand for the Attacks characteristic.
You want to keep HoW out because it demonstrates that this is incorrect - Attack demonstrably does not refer to the Attacks characteristic.

I am not saying multiple Smash attacks, but a single Smash attack with bonus attacks seems to be part of your argument, as you are quite clearly stating that these bonuses are NOT Modifiers (and only Modifiers apply Set Values).

Because you don't have permission to apply bonus attacks to Smash. If you roll to hit more than once, did you use a single attack?

"as indicated on its characteristics profile" IS a set value.

Really? Since set values are applied last, no additions or subtraction a can ever happen. Are you sure about your statement? Perhaps a rules quote would help...

In the Spoiler above, only:
• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.
Can modify a value that you read from the Codex.
Lasher Tendrils are part of "Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks."

Statement without support.

Lasher Tendrils are just as much of a "bonus attack" than having 2CCW or Charge Bonus are.

They're worded compete,y differently, so I'm not sure why you would come to that conclusion.

Whether these are Attacks or attacks or aTtAcks, i don't think it would change the result of A(1)+1+1-2= 1 Attack. Even if i do agree with FlingItNow that Attacks are a defined term found throughout the BrB.

You and Fling are demonstrably wrong - HoW proves it.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 13:33:51

Post by: FlingitNow

HoW proves nothing. All it proves is a flamer wielding Assault Marine charges a Lasher tendril Maulerfiend the only attack he gets is his Hammer of wrath.

Once again the question you can not answer without destroying your argument is:


Do the bonus attacks modify the number of attacks a model makes in close combat?

I'm guessing your side will once again refuse to answer this simple question because you know your interpretation has no grounds in RaW. Another post without an answer will be taken as concession.

Reply by: Happyjew - click to view full reply 

46128

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 13:46:14

Post by: Happyjew

 FlingitNow wrote:
HoW proves nothing. All it proves is a flamer wielding Assault Marine charges a Lasher tendril Maulerfiend the only attack he gets is his Hammer of wrath.

Once again the question you can not answer without destroying your argument is:


Do the bonus attacks modify the number of attacks a model makes in close combat?

I'm guessing your side will once again refuse to answer this simple question because you know your interpretation has no grounds in RaW. Another post without an answer will be taken as concession.

Number of attacks? Yes. Attack characteristic? No.


Or are you saying an Assault Marine with CCW and Pistol is A2 in close combat?

Reply by: BlackTalos - click to view full reply 

81346

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 14:04:11

Post by: BlackTalos

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Hammer of Wrath is a separate attack, just like Mandiblasters or Soul Blaze. It is not a models' "Standard Attack" which makes use of the Attack Characteristic. The use of the word "Attack" is indeed misleading, and i could easily make the same connection: It is an "Attack" as such it is also affected: Old One Eye can only HoW 1 Attack against Lasher Tendrils... However i would like to point out "This Attack does not benefit from any of the model’s special rules (such as Furious Charge, Rending etc.)" As such i would think that "Lasher Tendrils" do not affect HoW. But i would point out yet again that this is a different, not really relevant subject. We are discussing Attacks and Modifiers, and as such i would keep HoW out of it...

Your argument (and others) hinges on references to Attack being shorthand for the Attacks characteristic.
You want to keep HoW out because it demonstrates that this is incorrect - Attack demonstrably does not refer to the Attacks characteristic.

I am not saying multiple Smash attacks, but a single Smash attack with bonus attacks seems to be part of your argument, as you are quite clearly stating that these bonuses are NOT Modifiers (and only Modifiers apply Set Values).

Because you don't have permission to apply bonus attacks to Smash. If you roll to hit more than once, did you use a single attack?

"as indicated on its characteristics profile" IS a set value.

Really? Since set values are applied last, no additions or subtraction a can ever happen. Are you sure about your statement? Perhaps a rules quote would help...

In the Spoiler above, only:
• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.
Can modify a value that you read from the Codex.
Lasher Tendrils are part of "Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks."

Statement without support.

Lasher Tendrils are just as much of a "bonus attack" than having 2CCW or Charge Bonus are.

They're worded compete,y differently, so I'm not sure why you would come to that conclusion.

Whether these are Attacks or attacks or aTtAcks, i don't think it would change the result of A(1)+1+1-2= 1 Attack. Even if i do agree with FlingItNow that Attacks are a defined term found throughout the BrB.

You and Fling are demonstrably wrong - HoW proves it.

I will now drop HoW, as i said in the post you Quoted, i do not find it relevant here. HoW is separate as it does not use the Attack Characteristic, even if it has the word "Attack" contained. I also agreed with you that it would be taken into account (Old One eye) but don't seem to have noticed the part where i actually agreed with you.

Now, pray tell what rules your are using to Modify a model's number of attacks, when faced with Lasher Tendrils?
I use these:

Number of Attacks

Each engaged model makes a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile, plus the following bonus attacks:

• +1 Charge Bonus: Engaged models that charged this turn get +1 Attack this turn. Models in units that made a disordered charge do not get this bonus.
• +1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and a sword in each.
• Other Bonuses: Models may have other special rules and wargear that confer extra Attacks.

These are the only rules governing the number of attacks you make in Close Combat. If i am missing rules that by RaW define how many Attacks a model makes, please enlighten me...

The Rules quoted above are clear: "a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile" This is the number printed in your Codex. It IS a set value. Not in "Modifiers" terms a set value, but a set number printed on black and white on paper. It cannot change unless you insist on amending your printed Codex...
You then have bonuses for Charging and 2 weapons. Only "Other Bonuses: Models may have..." Covers any type of other rules that increases (Or Decreases) your A Characteristic read from your printed Codex.

Relatively simple.

Reply by: rigeld2 - click to view full reply 

47462

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 14:04:31

Post by: rigeld2

 FlingitNow wrote:
HoW proves nothing. All it proves is a flamer wielding Assault Marine charges a Lasher tendril Maulerfiend the only attack he gets is his Hammer of wrath.

So "minimum of 1" means nothing to you? And how does it prove nothing? If your assertion is that Attack == Attacks characteristic, then the HoW rule must read as follows:

Spoiler:

If a model with this special rule ends its charge move in base or hull contact with an enemy model, it makes one additional Attacks characteristic that hits automatically and is resolved at the model’s unmodified Strength with AP-. This Attacks characteristic does not benefit from any of the model’s special rules (such as Furious Charge, Rending etc.). This Attacks characteristic is resolved during the Fight sub-phase at the Initiative 10 step, but does not grant the model an additional Pile In move.

That looks correct to you? Please explain how you make an Attacks characteristic.

Once again the question you can not answer without destroying your argument is:

Do the bonus attacks modify the number of attacks a model makes in close combat?

Yes. It doesn't destroy my argument at all. I've said as much from the beginning.

I'm guessing your side will once again refuse to answer this simple question because you know your interpretation has no grounds in RaW. Another post without an answer will be taken as concession.

Since you're on ignore I didn't have the "pleasure" of seeing what you said until now - because Happy quoted you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackTalos wrote:
I will now drop HoW, as i said in the post you Quoted, i do not find it relevant here. HoW is separate as it does not use the Attack Characteristic, even if it has the word "Attack" contained. I also agreed with you that it would be taken into account (Old One eye) but don't seem to have noticed the part where i actually agreed with you.

So "Attack" only means "Attacks characteristic" when it's convenient to you?

Now, pray tell what rules your are using to Modify a model's number of attacks, when faced with Lasher Tendrils?

The modifier rules. Lasher Tendrils specifies it modifies the Attacks characteristic. The model making the attacks isn't using the Lasher Tendrils wargear, so the quoted rule doesn't apply - the Model doesn't have the special rule, a different model does.

These are the only rules governing the number of attacks you make in Close Combat.

False. Lasher Tendrils modifies them, as stated in its special rules.

If i am missing rules that by RaW define how many Attacks a model makes, please enlighten me...

It's been quoted in this thread. Perhaps you've read the rule?

The Rules quoted above are clear: "a number of attacks (A) as indicated on its characteristics profile" This is the number printed in your Codex. It IS a set value. Not in "Modifiers" terms a set value, but a set number printed on black and white on paper. It cannot change unless you insist on amending your printed Codex...

It's a set value but not a set value? Words mean things.

You then have bonuses for Charging and 2 weapons. Only "Other Bonuses: Models may have..." Covers any type of other rules that increases (Or Decreases) your A Characteristic read from your printed Codex.

No, it doesn't. "Other Bonuses" covers rules your model has. It does not cover rules other models have.

Reply by: FlingitNow - click to view full reply 

22508

Things that reduce enemy attacks - what order do you apply them? @ 2014/09/22 18:16:51

Post by: FlingitNow

 Happyjew wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
HoW proves nothing. All it proves is a flamer wielding Assault Marine charges a Lasher tendril Maulerfiend the only attack he gets is his Hammer of wrath.

Once again the question you can not answer without destroying your argument is:


Do the bonus attacks modify the number of attacks a model makes in close combat?

I'm guessing your side will once again refuse to answer this simple question because you know your interpretation has no grounds in RaW. Another post without an answer will be taken as concession.

Number of attacks? Yes. Attack characteristic? No.


Or are you saying an Assault Marine with CCW and Pistol is A2 in close combat?

What is the rulebook definition of the attacks characteristic?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

So "minimum of 1" means nothing to you? And how does it prove nothing? If your assertion is that Attack == Attacks characteristic, then the HoW rule must read as follows: 

How many attacks would the model make in my example? My assertion is that Attacks characteristic = number of attacks a model makes in close combat. As per the rulebook. Are you claiming the rulebook is wrong? Your RaW is based on the rulebook being incorrect? How is that RaW?