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

Fragile wrote:And you will still come out with the same result. Either way you read it, the multiplier / addition effects will come up with the same number.

Nope, Smash is applied last, as per the Smash rule.

"If it does so, roll To Hit as norrnal, but halve its Attacks characteristic." This is long after its Attacks characteristic is determined with buffs.

Smash is the advanced rule, Basic multiple modifiers is the basic rule. Advanced > Basic.

DeathReaper wrote:

fleetofclaw wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Division is not mentioned as a Multiplier.

Division is a Divisor not a Multiplier.

The two can produce similar results, but they are not the same.

You are simply wrong. It is not opinion, it is a fact, please drop this portion of your argument for the love of God.

Please Learn the Definition of Multiplier and Divisor.

here check these if you want to know more:

http://bit.ly/ODeLDE

http://bit.ly/ODeQXN

This is just ridiculous. No where in the book does it say that the "multiplier" has to be an integer. Wait...let's just math hammer this to make sure...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=field+of+rational+numbers

Oh yes indeed! The set of rational numbers, denoted Q, has the algebraic structure of a field. Hence the group of units, denoted Q*, is the collection of all non-zero rational numbers and each one of these has a multiplicative inverse which is ALSO a rational number.

<\sarcasm>

Deathreapers point isn't about Order of Operations. I am positive he knows that it's Multiply/Divide then Addition/Subtraction. Im sure he would also concide that multiplying by .5 is the same as dividing by 2.

The crux of the arguement is the timing of the division.
When do you determine the Attack Charistic?

I think we all can agree that a Tervigon has 3 Base Attacks.

At the begining of the Assult Phase, Warp Time is rolled, the Tervigon gains +D3 attacks (avg 2, Running total 5)

Tervigon Charges +1 (Running Total 6)

At the begning of the Fight Substep Crushing Claws are rolled. +D3 attacks (avg 2 Running Total 8)

Tervigon's Initive of 1, Chooses smash, (Total 8*.5=4)

This follows the rules, Order of Operations and timing. IMO this is how it should be done. So Mathmaticly speaking the formula would be (3+1+D3+D3)/2=y which we all can agree on IS a justifiable formula

DeathReaper wrote:
"If it does so, roll To Hit as norrnal, but halve its Attacks characteristic." This is long after its Attacks characteristic is determined with buffs.

Smash is the advanced rule, Basic multiple modifiers is the basic rule. Advanced > Basic.

When worded that way, you seem have a point. But it does not specifically say when to halve it. It is pointing out two different things, rolling To Hit normally, and halving your attacks. So we know that we will be rolling To Hit normally, but now we have to halve our attacks. To do so, the rulebook tells us how on pg. 2 in Multiple Modifiers. We go through those rules, and now we have successfully halved our attacks and are at (x/2)+bonuses. We now roll To Hit as normal and we have satisfied Smash Attack special rules to the letter.

If it said, "when rolling to hit, halve it's attacks" then I would agree with you.

EDIT: Yonush, that would be correct, except the Smash attack doesn't specifically tell us when to halve the attacks, so we have to abide by the rulebook rules for doing so, which says multipliers first.

That quote is direct from P. 42 Smash Rules.

It is all one sentence, and it does say when to Halve it:

there is more that I left out, but it seems rather relevant now:

"when it makes its close combat attacks, it can choose to instead make a Smash Attack. If it does so, roll To Hit as norrnal, but halve its Attacks characteristic." P.42 Smash Rules.

When it makes its close combat attacks is when you Halve your attacks and roll to hit as normal.

Ok, I see that, but there is this on pg. 24...

"When their Initiative step is reached, models with that Initiative who are still alive must attack"

Which goes right into the bold portion

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

And then it lists the bonus attacks. So you add bonus attacks when the model is making his close combat attacks. Which means that it all happens at the same time, and the rules for multiple modifiers applies.

EDIT: for typo's

Ratca, there is still an issue with the timing of the bonus attacks from warp speed and crushing claws going by your process.

Based on your process it would be (3+d3+d3)*.5+1=y

You stil have to halve the bonus attacks from crushing claws and warp speed.

Nope, Smash is applied last, as per the Smash rule.

"If it does so, roll To Hit as norrnal, but halve its Attacks characteristic." This is long after its Attacks characteristic is determined with buffs.

Smash is the advanced rule, Basic multiple modifiers is the basic rule. Advanced > Basic.

The problem here is your trying to make an absolute literal translation of the rules using part of a sentence. Doing so contradicts itself. Your statement that its after the "Roll To Hit" is impossible. Simply as written you have already rolled the dice. You cannot go back after you roll and divide the base attacks and change the outcomes. Taking the whole sentence rather than part of the sentence shows that during the process you will halve your attacks "as normal" while making a Smash attack over a regular set of attacks.

This is in essence the same argument with Enfeeble and Powerfists.

Fragile wrote:[This is in essence the same argument with Enfeeble and Powerfists.

Not at all. The Power Fist is not its own Advanced rule.

Smash is. you Halve your attacks AND roll to hit. as per smash.

Order of when modifiers land means absolutely positively nothing. Seriously. ZERO. Read how multiple modifiers work, if you have multiple modifiers you apply them as shown. Do you seriously think they posted that paragraph thinking that it only applies when all modifiers hit you simultaneously or in a certain order. FFS no.

Continually quoting the line from Smash also means nothing, as it is dubious at best that it is making a clear statement about timing in the first place. In fact, it could be just as easily interpreted that all it does is clarify whether Smash has any affect on your to hit rolls, which it does not. Seriously, I'm deciding to Smash in mid swing? No.

No matter what you say Warp Speed, regardless of when I cast it, is an additive modifier, (unless you're telling me I get to keep that attack characteristic through the rest of the game). Therefore, whenever other modifiers are applied, the formula does not magically change according to your whim. Base stat * multiplier + additive + additive, etc. Again, if you're trying to argue that GW's exceedingly clear ruling on multiple modifiers only applies when modifiers hit you simultaneously (which happens exactly somewhere between 0 and never). If, however, you're telling me Warp Speed is not a modifier, fantastic!

AND, that one dude never answered my question whether I get my other CC bonuses with Smash (bonesword / scything talons / etc). Do you know why? Because if he said no he'd get laughed off the thread. If he said yes, then he'd realize his argument that Smash somehow magically ignores the basic rules of his choosing is ridiculous. The advanced rules take over where there is something being amended or contradicted, you don't just throw everything out unless it is explicitly reintroduced in the Advanced rule. That applies to your argument too Death Reaper. (Though I'm about 90% certain that you two are one and the same person anyway; a smart yet disingenious troll)

Great quote I heard on the 11th Company, rule lawyering is like farts, if you have to push too hard it's probably sh*t.

Someone already mentioned, this is not even a debate in any serious gaming circles. In fact, I count 3 people in this entire thread in the "halve after all other modifiers are applied" camp. As this crock of an argument will have zero impact on my actual gaming life I'm signing out.

fleetofclaw, while I disagree with them I do understand their point. THeir argument is as follows:

Q. How many times does a model get to attack in cc?
A. The number of Attacks on the profile of the model, modified by various factors, i.e. Charging.

Q. When does Smash half your Attacks?
A. When the Attacks are made, which is after everything is already added in.

It is not a mathematical order of operations misunderstanding. It is a timing issue. Basically it is as follows:

Start of phase A=3 (base) + D3 (Warp Time)
Start of Fight sub-phase A=3 + D3 + 1 (charge) + D3 (Crushing Claws)
Initiative 1: A = (3+1+2D3)/2

Sorry, warp time is still an additive modifier and does not magically change spots on ye old multiple modifier calculation just because someone decides they don't want the tervigon a couple of attacks. Timing does not make a difference. Tell me when a multiplier and an additive / subtractive modifier going of simultaneously ever happens in this game? If you're telling me the effect that causes the multiplier has to happen first in order for GW's explicit ruling to take effect then why did they just tell us "calculate modifiers in the order they are applied. In the case of simultaneous effects, follow this formula:"

By the "timing" logic, then, assuming we had a S4 MC (for the sake of argument), he could charge with adrenal glands and come out with a S10 Smash (charge sets off AG, attack sets off Smash, S4 + 1 = S5, S5 * 2 = S10.
To that I say no, you would have a S9 Smash. Multiplier then additive; timing of effects be darned. S4*2 + 1 = S9

Haha I just couldn't stay away could I?

That is correct HJ.

There is a Timing issue because the basic Multiple Modifier rules are superseded by the Advanced Smash rules.

and we all know that Advanced Trumps Basic.

fleetofclaw wrote:...That applies to your argument too Death Reaper. (Though I'm about 90% certain that you two are one and the same person anyway; a smart yet disingenious troll)

Great quote I heard on the 11th Company, rule lawyering is like farts, if you have to push too hard it's probably sh*t...

Maybe Follow the Tenets of the forum?

Name calling has no place in a rules debate (Or any debate really). All it does is serve to show you in a bad light, and we would not want that.

So Please refrain from the name calling. Thanks

P.S. who am I the same person as? I have but one account to give for the Dakka boards... saying otherwise is just rude.

fleetofclaw wrote:Tell me when a multiplier and an additive / subtractive modifier going of simultaneously ever happens in this game?

Furious Charge on a model armed with a Power Fist.

DeathReaper wrote:That is correct HJ.

There is a Timing issue because the basic Multiple Modifier rules are superseded by the Advanced Smash rules.

and we all know that Advanced Trumps Basic.

No it's not because Smash does not tell us modifiers are calculated any differently.

fleetofclaw wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:That is correct HJ.

There is a Timing issue because the basic Multiple Modifier rules are superseded by the Advanced Smash rules.

and we all know that Advanced Trumps Basic.

No it's not because Smash does not tell us modifiers are calculated any differently.

Re-read smash. It sets its own timing on when you divide the attacks.

so the advanced rule supersedes the basic multiple modifiers rule.

It doesn't set any timing. You cannot halve something after you roll, which is the rule your trying to set. The word "BUT" is not a timing word.

"When it makes a close combat attack.." Tells you when you can use Smash.

"Roll to hit as normal.." Tells you how to make a smash attack. The same as a normal set of close combat attacks.

...But halve its Attack Characteristic." Gives you an exception to the normal close combat procedure. There is no magical change in timing of when you determine your attacks. "as normal" says to follow the normal rules for CC, pages 23-26.

Furious Charge on a model armed with a Power Fist.

Nothing about this changes the modifier rule on page 2 Happy.

when it makes its close combat attacks it can choose to instead make a Smash Anack. If it does so...halve its Attacks characteristic.

There is your timing, you Halve the attacks and roll to hit as normal. This is an advanced rule.

fleetofclaw wrote:

AND, that one dude never answered my question whether I get my other CC bonuses with Smash (bonesword / scything talons / etc). Do you know why? Because if he said no he'd get laughed off the thread. If he said yes, then he'd realize his argument that Smash somehow magically ignores the basic rules of his choosing is ridiculous. The advanced rules take over where there is something being amended or contradicted, you don't just throw everything out unless it is explicitly reintroduced in the Advanced rule. That applies to your argument too Death Reaper. (Though I'm about 90% certain that you two are one and the same person anyway; a smart yet disingenious troll)
.

Or maybe that 'one dude' a.k.a Me which whom you are referring to, has a thing called a LIFE which you appear to lack. And was out all day with the fam going out shopping having dinner and you know all that other normal stuff people do in their lives outside of forums.

I apologize that I could not reply to your urgent message instantly.

As for your question, it was a dumb question to begin with because there's nothing in the smash rule that would prevent special rules from whatever you are using to apply aswell. The only thing being modified by the smash attack is the strength value of your attacks along with the attack profile.

That's like asking me 'If you take a difficult terrain test, how far do you fall back?'

The two just don't connect with each other. Now you can laugh yourself off the thread or whatever as per your ignorant comment sir.

Fragile, I was responding to fleetofclaws question of an additive modifier and multiplative modifier going off at the same time.
The issue is more of a "What do they mean by Attack characteristic?" There are two options:
1: The Attack characteristic listed in the profile. If this is what they mean, it does not matter when you halve it as you would still get all your bonus Attacks.
2: The Attack characteristic listed in the profile plus any bonus Attacks. If this is what is meant, then the halving is done after everything else as the formula in this case would be "(X+Y+Z)*0.5".

DR is of the opinion that it is the second interpretation, where as most everyone else feels that it is the first.

Happyjew wrote:Fragile, I was responding to fleetofclaws question of an additive modifier and multiplative modifier going off at the same time.
The issue is more of a "What do they mean by Attack characteristic?" There are two options:
1: The Attack characteristic listed in the profile. If this is what they mean, it does not matter when you halve it as you would still get all your bonus Attacks.
2: The Attack characteristic listed in the profile plus any bonus Attacks. If this is what is meant, then the halving is done after everything else as the formula in this case would be "(X+Y+Z)*0.5".

DR is of the opinion that it is the second interpretation, where as most everyone else feels that it is the first.

And that is mostly because of the modifiers section on P. 2 which says "Attacks and Wounds are the only characteristics that can be raised above 10"

If they are static on the profile you could not ever raise it above 10 since the base stat would not be modified, you would just have bonus attacks.

But since it says it can be modified above 10 tells me that any bonuses are added into the Attacks Characteristic.

Or possiblily that was directed at me, whom was a work all day with little access to a computer... regardless name calling is against the tenants.

As to the statement timeing has nothing to do with it, the rules disagree with you.

When do you add the +d3 attacks from Crushing Claws. Accrording to the rules, you add them at the begining of the Fight Sub-phase. (Tyranid FAQ) Where in the rules does it direct you to add them during your inititive(sp) step?

When do you add the +d3 attacks from Warp Speed. Accroding to the rules, you add them at the begining of the Assualt Phase. (BRB) Where in the rules does it direct you to add them during your inititive(sp) step?

When do you add the +1 from Charging? I'll give you this one, you add this during your inititive(sp) step when you make your To Hit rolls.

As I play Nids as my main army, I would LOVE it, if the Tervigon got 6-8 Smash attacks on the charge, but the rules don't support it.

As to when are there additive and multiplyers going at the same inititive? The most noticeable one is Power Fists and Furious Charge, but there are others and if you want more just ask, im sure they can be found.

Just throwing in my vote that division == multiplication. Just the same as roots == exponentiation.

3/2=1.5
3*0.5=1.5

Sqrt(4) = 2
4^(1/2)=2

Punch it into a calculator, and learn some maths. You can do this to any number imaginable and it will be exactly the same result. Want to know why? They're the same.

As was stated earlier, most processors only do math in addition. That's it, just addition. No subtraction, no multiplication, no division, it's straight up adding.

Rephistorch

My number is three.

Add 2
Now
Add 2
Now
Add 1
Now
Divide by 2 (or multiply by .5)

Whats your total?

It's not 3+2+2+1*.5
Its 3+2=5+2=7+1=8*.5=4 or (3+2+2+1).5=4 as all the bonuses are added at different points in time.

Rephistorch wrote:Just throwing in my vote that division == multiplication. Just the same as roots == exponentiation.

3/2=1.5
3*0.5=1.5

Sqrt(4) = 2
4^(1/2)=2

Punch it into a calculator, and learn some maths. You can do this to any number imaginable and it will be exactly the same result. Want to know why? They're the same.

As was stated earlier, most processors only do math in addition. That's it, just addition. No subtraction, no multiplication, no division, it's straight up adding.

Yonush wrote:Rephistorch

My number is three.

Add 2
Now
Add 2
Now
Add 1
Now
Divide by 2 (or multiply by .5)

Whats your total?

Wrong order. Your number is three. Now multiply by 0.5, add 2, add 2, add 1. Result is 2+2+2+1 = 7.

Rephistorch wrote:Just throwing in my vote that division == multiplication. Just the same as roots == exponentiation.

3/2=1.5
3*0.5=1.5

Sqrt(4) = 2
4^(1/2)=2

Punch it into a calculator, and learn some maths. You can do this to any number imaginable and it will be exactly the same result. Want to know why? They're the same.

As was stated earlier, most processors only do math in addition. That's it, just addition. No subtraction, no multiplication, no division, it's straight up adding.

And we know this, what you guys seem to fail to understand is that the argument is not about solving an equation. It's about properly reading the rules of 40k.

In 40k you do things in a specific way, while you state that a processor uses ONLY addition. This game cannot afford to have every rule based on the concept of addition alone, thus you include multiplication/substraction/division

And it tells you in clear rules on page 2 and page 5 how each of these concepts are applied and gives a clear example on the term HALVE that when used it is under the division category and tells you what to do with it.

Smash rule is one of the few rules in the game that uses this exact term that we have already been told how to apply. But people want to force the page 2 rules on something that is meant to follow page 5 and page 7 rules. Both for division adn for advanced rules that should overwrite whatever was on page 2.

Thus we came to this silly argument from the refusal to accept the nature of the beast

Rephistorch, where are you getting that the bonus for Crushing Claws and Warp Speed ar added during the Inititive steps not when they are rolled for? Please cite a rule.

As I said there are two ways of reading the rule:
3/2+D3+D3+1
(3+D3+D3+1)/2

It all depends on your reading of the rule. Now we can agree to disagree and wait till GW does not FAQ this.

Akaiyou wrote:

Rephistorch wrote:Just throwing in my vote that division == multiplication. Just the same as roots == exponentiation.

3/2=1.5
3*0.5=1.5

Sqrt(4) = 2
4^(1/2)=2

Punch it into a calculator, and learn some maths. You can do this to any number imaginable and it will be exactly the same result. Want to know why? They're the same.

As was stated earlier, most processors only do math in addition. That's it, just addition. No subtraction, no multiplication, no division, it's straight up adding.

And we know this, what you guys seem to fail to understand is that the argument is not about solving an equation. It's about properly reading the rules of 40k.

In 40k you do things in a specific way, while you state that a processor uses ONLY addition. This game cannot afford to have every rule based on the concept of addition alone, thus you include multiplication/substraction/division

And it tells you in clear rules on page 2 and page 5 how each of these concepts are applied and gives a clear example on the term HALVE that when used it is under the division category and tells you what to do with it.

Smash rule is one of the few rules in the game that uses this exact term that we have already been told how to apply. But people want to force the page 2 rules on something that is meant to follow page 5 and page 7 rules. Both for division adn for advanced rules that should overwrite whatever was on page 2.

Thus we came to this silly argument from the refusal to accept the nature of the beast

Alright, mathematical 'proof': 3 * 1/2 = 1.5
3 / 2 = 1.5
3 * 0.5 = 1.5

Prove that's wrong and you can win your argument. If you can't prove that wrong (because i have proven correct in the first place), you lose the argument.

After reviewing the rules in question, I agree that claws and warp speed both add to attacks before you swing. BUT smash doesn't overwrite the Multiple Modifier rules, and therefore do not halve the extra attacks.

I can't see why it would overwrite the multiple modifier rules without specifically saying that it does.