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.

Yeah, uh I don't even.

http://www.themathpage.com/alg/word-problems.htm

Here. I mean read that or something , I'm out.

Gonna go play my Fateweaver casting 12 to 16 spells or whatever.

Hollismason wrote:
The number of apples a person can have depends on his age.

The number of apples a person can have is equal to his age.


Michael is 20 years old, how many apples can he have according to the first sentence? How many apples can Michael have according to the 2nd sentence? Please print your answer below.

The second one is obviously 20.

As to the first, there is not enough information.

Who is providing the apples? Does Michael have to purchase said apples? If so, how much do they cost? How much does Michael make? How much is taken out for taxes? How much does Michael set aside from each paycheck? Does Michael even have a job? If not, does he have food stamps?

Hollismason wrote:
You seem to have difficulty with the English language.

Your question isn't the same as the one I put forth. I gave you all information you needed to answer both of those questions and yet you still willfully ignored it.

I work with troubled teens, specifically kids who are on drugs, sex workers, I teach for GED training, these kids who have literally elementary education and have lived on the streets. Have a better understanding of the English language and are more negotiable than the people here. Like people I would expect to have difficult understanding word problems, or have trouble negotiating, don't.

If you can not answer that question, you are either being purposefully difficult, or you genuinely do not know how to answer it. I am not sure which is worse.

The question you asked (like the one I did) was unanswerable. So explain the difference all I did was change apples for pocket money and age for earnings. Yes I also made it time bound (per week) to make it more like the rule (per turn).

So what otherwise is the difference between our questions? Please enlighten me.

I literally gave you the tools you need to understand that question. Go read that website it's a easy to read 2nd grade approach to word problems.

You have all the relevant information to answer both those questions.

Hollismason wrote:
Go read that website it's a easy to read 2nd grade approach to word problems.

You have all the relevant information to answer both those questions.

X depends on B
What is X?
Only the equation is missing.

That's litterally what you're asking. The relevent information to solve it is not there.
And can you perhaps try not to insult everyone simply for not agreeing with you?

Kyutaru wrote: As I stated already, please make your case, do not simply deconstruct mine. You're rewording an existing line of the rules in order to demonstrate a combined ruling which shows you do not understand how multiple restrictions interact. Mastery Level is like the sides of a polygon being equal. Warp Charges is like there being exactly four 90 degree angles. Having both means you are a square as well as a rectangle. Having only one disqualifies you from being labelled as a square. 

So if you would, address the following statement please... 

Can the number of powers a Psyker may use each turn be dependent on his Mastery Level if his Mastery Level plays no part in restricting him? Please cite the rules that allow Be'lakor to overrule this basic requirement without quoting Warp Charges as the quantity your army possesses has no dependency on his mastery level. 

So you're unable to answer the question?

I will answer yours. Yes it can be dependant on his Mastery and still not restricted by it. For instance a psyker can only cast each power once and the number of powers he has depends on his Mastery Level.

You've still not come up for a reason for the limit not being ML+1000. Which is just as valid an interpretation of the meaning of the sentence as the limit ML+0. Which you and Hollismason seem to be willfully ignorant of.

 grendel083 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Go read that website it's a easy to read 2nd grade approach to word problems.

You have all the relevant information to answer both those questions.

X depends on B
What is X?
Only the equation is missing.

That's litterally what you're asking. The relevent information to solve it is not there.
And can you perhaps try not to insult everyone simply for not agreeing with you?

I believe it is more F(B)=X were B is undefined. X depends on B but we don't have the dependency.

Hollismason wrote:
I literally gave you the tools you need to understand that question. Go read that website it's a easy to read 2nd grade approach to word problems.

You have all the relevant information to answer both those questions.

Have you read that site? You seem to not understand how English Problems work at all.

The number of apples a person can have depends on his age. 

The number of apples a person can have is equal to his age. 


Michael is 20 years old, how many apples can he have according to the first sentence? How many apples can Michael have according to the 2nd sentence?

That's what you've put. Lets swap variables for letters:

The number of X a person can have depends on Y.

The number of X a person can have equals Y.

Y is 20. Solve X for first sentence and second sentence.

So lets change X and Y for other variables lets say X is pocket money and Y is his farther's earnings. His farthers earnings are £1000. Now lets look again, given that we can all solve the second sentence lets just look at the first as this is where your understanding seems to be struggling:


The number of pocket money a person can have depends on his farther's earning.

His Farther's earnings are £1000. Solve.

You've still not come up for a reason for the limit not being ML+1000. Which is just as valid an interpretation of the meaning of the sentence as the limit ML+0. Which you and Hollismason seem to be willfully ignorant of.

So far we are in the realm of the maximum number of manifest attempts being of the form: ML + X (constant) + Y(psychic power count) + Z(total warp charges)

Do you agree that the maximum number of manifest attempts for any mastery level, from 0 to infinity cannot be negative?
- If so, then X >= 0.
Do you think that two psykers with the same mastery level have the same maximum number of manifest attempts?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then Y is 0.
Do you agree that the maximum number of manifest attempts can be determined from mastery level, independent of how many other psychers are in your army?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then Z is 0.
Do you agree that the maximum number of manifest attempts can be determined from mastery level, independent of the outcome of the 1d6 roll for warp charges?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then X <= 1.

 FlingitNow wrote:

Kyutaru wrote:Can the number of powers a Psyker may use each turn be dependent on his Mastery Level if his Mastery Level plays no part in restricting him? Please cite the rules that allow Be'lakor to overrule this basic requirement without quoting Warp Charges as the quantity your army possesses has no dependency on his mastery level. 

I will answer yours. Yes it can be dependant on his Mastery and still not restricted by it. For instance a psyker can only cast each power once and the number of powers he has depends on his Mastery Level.

And there is where your definition breaks, so you have to failed to correctly answer the question. For instance a psyker can possess 7 powers (such as Be'lakor) which has no dependency on his Mastery Level at all. Regardless of what happens to his Mastery Level, Be'lakor always has 7 powers. If they decide to update the Telepathy discipline such that it contains 10 powers in the future, his number of powers per turn will change once again because it literally has nothing to do with his Mastery Level at all.

So as I stated already, please cite the rules that allow Be'lakor to overrule the basic requirement of Mastery Level dependency when it clearly is not dependent on his Mastery Level at all. Bear in mind, I'm not saying it ONLY needs to be based on his Mastery Level, but it DOES need to be based on his Mastery Level. Your answer does not require any dependency on his mastery level, which if you followed my social security example you'd know that would make your interpretation inherently wrong. No interpretation that rejects Mastery Level dependency is permitted by RAW.

 FlingitNow wrote:
You've still not come up for a reason for the limit not being ML+1000. Which is just as valid an interpretation of the meaning of the sentence as the limit ML+0. Which you and Hollismason seem to be willfully ignorant of.

Warhammer 40k is a permissive ruleset and there is no permission given to add 1000 to your Mastery Level, just as there is no permission to subtract, multiply, divide, or otherwise alter the number pertaining to Mastery Level. As it is literally impossible to modify Mastery Level because of this, then the realm of rational number possibilities is reduced to a single number: ML.

barnowl wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Go read that website it's a easy to read 2nd grade approach to word problems.

You have all the relevant information to answer both those questions.

X depends on B
What is X?
Only the equation is missing.

That's litterally what you're asking. The relevent information to solve it is not there.
And can you perhaps try not to insult everyone simply for not agreeing with you?

I believe it is more F(B)=X were B is undefined. X depends on B but we don't have the dependency.

It's literally simpler than that.

The X of psychic powers a Psyker can use each turn depends on his Y.

X = Y

Y = Mastery Level

We know X is equal to Y, we know that Y can be ML1, ML2, ML3, ML4.... We know that there is an exception to the rules that Psykers may gain extra spells, which has no correspondence with their Mastery Level.

We don't have to deal with any other statement what so ever , but this statement , not warp charge, not spells known nothing matters because as long as that statement remains true then we are following the rules.

People are purposefully over complicating it in order to twist or bend their interpretations to suit their needs and or feelings when in fact the statement couldn't be more clear. Again this is literally people purposefully trying to make something vague through weird syntax arguments.

So if this following is true:

The X of psychic powers a Psyker can use each turn depends on his Y = True Statement

Then a Mastery Level 1 can be written like this:

The number (1) of psychic powers a Psyker can use each turn depends on his 1 = True

Grammatically that may not make a lot of sense but it is a true statement because X = Y.

I mean this is elementary word problems.

There doesn't need to be anything esle said as there are no other true statements because those statements become true if we maintain that this statement is true.

 FlingitNow wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
I literally gave you the tools you need to understand that question. Go read that website it's a easy to read 2nd grade approach to word problems.

You have all the relevant information to answer both those questions.

Have you read that site? You seem to not understand how English Problems work at all.

The number of apples a person can have depends on his age.

The number of apples a person can have is equal to his age.


Michael is 20 years old, how many apples can he have according to the first sentence? How many apples can Michael have according to the 2nd sentence?

That's what you've put. Lets swap variables for letters:

The number of X a person can have depends on Y.

The number of X a person can have equals Y.

Y is 20. Solve X for first sentence and second sentence.

So lets change X and Y for other variables lets say X is pocket money and Y is his farther's earnings. His farthers earnings are £1000. Now lets look again, given that we can all solve the second sentence lets just look at the first as this is where your understanding seems to be struggling:


The number of pocket money a person can have depends on his farther's earning.

His Farther's earnings are £1000. Solve.

Yea.. there are no other variables to that statement, it's X = Y. You just look dumb. We know the Variables, we know the variable is Mastery Level. We don't have to go further.

Hollismason wrote:

barnowl wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Go read that website it's a easy to read 2nd grade approach to word problems.

You have all the relevant information to answer both those questions.

X depends on B
What is X?
Only the equation is missing.

That's litterally what you're asking. The relevent information to solve it is not there.
And can you perhaps try not to insult everyone simply for not agreeing with you?

I believe it is more F(B)=X were B is undefined. X depends on B but we don't have the dependency.

It's literally simpler than that.

The X of psychic powers a Psyker can use each turn depends on his Y.

X = Y

Y = Mastery Level

We know X is equal to Y, we know that Y can be ML1, ML2, ML3, ML4.... We know that there is an exception to the rules that Psykers may gain extra spells, which has no correspondence with their Mastery Level.

We don't have to deal with any other statement what so ever , but this statement , not warp charge, not spells known nothing matters because as long as that statement remains true then we are following the rules.

People are purposefully over complicating it in order to twist or bend their interpretations to suit their needs and or feelings when in fact the statement couldn't be more clear. Again this is literally people purposefully trying to make something vague through weird syntax arguments.

So if this following is true:

The X of psychic powers a Psyker can use each turn depends on his Y = True Statement

Then a Mastery Level 1 can be written like this:

The number (1) of psychic powers a Psyker can use each turn depends on his 1 = True

Grammatically that may not make a lot of sense but it is a true statement because X = Y.

I mean this is elementary word problems.

There doesn't need to be anything esle said as there are no other true statements because those statements become true if we maintain that this statement is true.

"X depends on Y" =/= "X = Y"

We aren't told how X depends on Y, only that it does.

Y is defined, we know it's definition. We know that Master Level can equal 1, 2, 3, 4 or whatever it states it's mastery level to be in it's listing, if it does not state it we know to treat it as ML 1. The only "variable" which isn't really being used correctly ,but that's fine is the Mastery Level of the Psyker in question.

Everyone here is trying to make a correlation between Psychic Powers known and Mastery Level and we are given specific instructions on how to deal with that and what the exception is. This has no affect none on the ability of the Psyker to cast a X number of spells there is no correlation between spells know, warp charge left etc..

We just have to maintain that as a true statement.

madric wrote:

So far we are in the realm of the maximum number of manifest attempts being of the form: ML + X (constant) + Y(psychic power count) + Z(total warp charges)

You've ignored the countless other possibilities for the formula. Like for instance X(ML + Y) + Z. Or A(ML + X)(Y +B)(Z+C). You've just arbitrarily decided on this.

Do you agree that the maximum number of manifest attempts for any mastery level, from 0 to infinity cannot be negative?
- If so, then X >= 0.

Agreed.

Do you think that two psykers with the same mastery level have the same maximum number of manifest attempts?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then Y is 0.

The rule that says I can attempt to manifest if I have warp charge. So I don't believe that two psykers with the same Mastery Level must have the same maximum manifestation attempts do you have a rule that states they must? But lets press on assuming this to be true.

Do you agree that the maximum number of manifest attempts can be determined from mastery level, independent of how many other psychers are in your army?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then Z is 0.

This is absolutely false. Nothing states this. Yet again we'll press on with your arbitrary formular.

Do you agree that the maximum number of manifest attempts can be determined from mastery level, independent of the outcome of the 1d6 roll for warp charges?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then X <= 1.

Lets say I do agree with the statement that does not mean X<=1. X can still have any value. This is the issue you're just making lots and lots of things up and claiming they are rules.

 erick99 wrote:
"X depends on Y" =/= "X = Y"

We aren't told how X depends on Y, only that it does.

We also aren't granted permission to modify X or Y in any way.

The number of powers you can use each turn depends on Mastery Level. Mastery Level must be a real number and the number of powers you can use each turn must be a real number. Therefore, the number of powers you can use per turn is somewhere between +/- Infinity. We are granted no permission to modify Mastery Level in any way to reach the result. We are however told that the result is dependent on Mastery Level. There is only one answer in the universe that meets both dependency on Mastery Level and the zero permission to modify Mastery Level in any way. That number happens to be: Mastery Level.

We're not saying that the rules explicitly say that Mastery Level is the exact answer. We're saying that every single real number that exists cannot be the answer except for Mastery Level.

This is commonly referred to in Calculus as the Squeeze Theorem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeeze_theorem

The exact answer can be determined by ruling out every wrong answer.

Hollismason wrote:
Y is defined, we know it's definition.

Yes Y is defined, but nowhere does it say that X is equal to Y. That is pure assumption.

X is dependent on Y, but there is still no information on how.

Hollismason, the definition of y is f(x). The problem is that the function is undefined. Is the function "((X+7+10)*(1000-8))/992-17"? Or is it something simpler, like "X*2"?

You've ignored the countless other possibilities for the formula. Like for instance X(ML + Y) + Z. Or A(ML + X)(Y +B)(Z+C). You've just arbitrarily decided on this.

Do you agree there are infinite number of things and that a rule book cannot be of infinite length?
- If not, then no game can be played.
- If so, then rules are written in terms of what is possible and allowed, and if not explicitly stated, then it is not relevant. For example, checkers may say nothing about a piece being on the line between squares. It does not include or exclude it, the default when playing a game is to drop extraneous factors unless the rule calls for it.

Do you think that two psykers with the same mastery level have the same maximum number of manifest attempts?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then Y is 0.

The rule that says I can attempt to manifest if I have warp charge. So I don't believe that two psykers with the same Mastery Level must have the same maximum manifestation attempts do you have a rule that states they must? But lets press on assuming this to be true.

Another player kindly posted the rule you are referring to.

MANIFESTING PSYCHIC POWERS
The most common psychic action is the manifestation of psychic powers. Only the player whose turn it is can attempt to manifest psychic powers. If, after attempting to manifest a psychic power, you still have Warp Charge points left, you can attempt to manifest another psychic power with the same unit, or select another of your Psyker units and attempt to manifest a power the new unit knows.

The relevant starts with a preposition, limiting its scope: "If, after attempting to manifest a psychic power, ...". The remainder of that sentence only applies after you have attempted to manifest a power. The maximum number of manifest attempts is determined before you may manifest a power (obviously because it must be greater than 1 in order to ever attempt to manifest that power in the first place), thus this sentence bears no relation to the maximum number of powers.

Do you agree that the maximum number of manifest attempts can be determined from mastery level, independent of how many other psychers are in your army?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then Z is 0.

This is absolutely false. Nothing states this. Yet again we'll press on with your arbitrary formular.

Again, rule books do not need to negate every single possibility, otherwise they would be of infinite length. If you are making the claim that the maximum number of powers can be influence by the number of psykers in your army, the burden of proof is upon you to show the rule allowing this.

Do you agree that the maximum number of manifest attempts can be determined from mastery level, independent of the outcome of the 1d6 roll for warp charges?
- If not, please indicate the rule that leads you to believe this.
- If so, then X <= 1.

Lets say I do agree with the statement that does not mean X<=1. X can still have any value. This is the issue you're just making lots and lots of things up and claiming they are rules.

Yea.. there are no other variables to that statement, it's X = Y. You just look dumb. We know the Variables, we know the variable is Mastery Level. We don't have to go further.

Ha ha ha. I'm confident anyone with a basic understanding of maths would not think my correct statements make me look dumb. We have 2 variables X (apples in your example, pocket money in mine, number of powers cast per turn in the rules) and Y (age, father's earnings and Mastery Level).

"X depends on Y" does not mean "X = Y". I'll try again to make you understand but I suspect you already understand and are just being stubborn as I don't believe anyone could fail to grasp such simple concepts. Again answer this question (or tell me how it differs from "X depends on Y):

A persons pocket money depends on their father's earnings.

My father earns £1,000 a week how much pocket money do I get?

 FlingitNow wrote:

Yea.. there are no other variables to that statement, it's X = Y. You just look dumb. We know the Variables, we know the variable is Mastery Level. We don't have to go further.

Ha ha ha. I'm confident anyone with a basic understanding of maths would not think my correct statements make me look dumb. We have 2 variables X (apples in your example, pocket money in mine, number of powers cast per turn in the rules) and Y (age, father's earnings and Mastery Level).

"X depends on Y" does not mean "X = Y". I'll try again to make you understand but I suspect you already understand and are just being stubborn as I don't believe anyone could fail to grasp such simple concepts. Again answer this question (or tell me how it differs from "X depends on Y):

A persons pocket money depends on their father's earnings.

My father earns £1,000 a week how much pocket money do I get?

Apparently £1,000 a week. Can I live with you? I can always use more cash.

Kyutaru wrote:
The exact answer can be determined by ruling out every wrong answer.

Which in this particular case leaves you with no answer, since we are not given sufficient information to actually answer the question.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hollismason wrote:
The X of psychic powers a Psyker can use each turn depends on his Y.

X = Y

From where are you getting this definition of X?

We know X is equal to Y

No, we don't. We know that X is dependant on Y.

Dependant is not synonymous with equal.

 insaniak wrote:

Kyutaru wrote:
The exact answer can be determined by ruling out every wrong answer.

Which in this particular case leaves you with no answer, since we are not given sufficient information to actually answer the question.

Incorrect. We know all the answers it cannot be. We may therefore pick an answer from what's left over. There just happens to be only a single answer left.

 FlingitNow wrote:

Yea.. there are no other variables to that statement, it's X = Y. You just look dumb. We know the Variables, we know the variable is Mastery Level. We don't have to go further.

Ha ha ha. I'm confident anyone with a basic understanding of maths would not think my correct statements make me look dumb. We have 2 variables X (apples in your example, pocket money in mine, number of powers cast per turn in the rules) and Y (age, father's earnings and Mastery Level).

"X depends on Y" does not mean "X = Y". I'll try again to make you understand but I suspect you already understand and are just being stubborn as I don't believe anyone could fail to grasp such simple concepts. Again answer this question (or tell me how it differs from "X depends on Y):

A persons pocket money depends on their father's earnings.

My father earns £1,000 a week how much pocket money do I get?

We don't need to know that X = Y.

X > Y cannot be true as we have no permission to add anything to Mastery Level per the RAW.
X < Y cannot be true as we have no permission to subtract anything from Mastery Level per the RAW.
X and Y are related somehow by Mastery Level, say in the equation X = n * Y (this is the equation for dependency).
We must therefore determine what value 'n' is.

Can you think of any number that would work? I can.

Kyutaru wrote:
Incorrect. We know all the answers it cannot be.

Which simply gives us a list of things it is not. That doesn't mean that the only other answer you think applies must be the correct one... it simply means that you can only think of one other answer.


Rules don't work by forcing you to eliminate all of the impossible things in order to determine what you can do. That would be ridiculous.

Do you agree there are infinite number of things and that a rule book cannot be of infinite length? 
- If not, then no game can be played. 
- If so, then rules are written in terms of what is possible and allowed, and if not explicitly stated, then it is not relevant. For example, checkers may say nothing about a piece being on the line between squares. It does not include or exclude it, the default when playing a game is to drop extraneous factors unless the rule calls for it. 

Yes it is a permissive ruleset. So what in the rules tells you that the formula you are using is the one to use? That is my issue the rule in question gives us no indication of what the formula for the dependency is. So you've arbitrarily made up a formula. If you are arbitrarily making things up you can't claim they are rules. The rest of your post pretty much follows the same process.

If you agree with the premise, then the maximum number of powers can be no greater than the minimum possible roll. 

Sorry but why must the maximum be no greater than the minimum dice roll? Unless your premise was that you must always have enough dice to cast every power you can cast within the ML limit. Which is easily proven false by the fact that I could chuck all my dice at the first power and then by your definition I still must be allowed to cast the others. Or say I only have 1 ML1Psyker and he only has WC3 powers I roll a 1 for WC by your definition I must be able to cast but I can't.

I'm sorry you feel that I'm "making things up", I have used nothing outside of first order logic. I am using it to take known facts, and derive new facts from them following the rules of logic. Follow the process and you will end up at the same conclusions.

But you haven't followed logic. You taken known facts made arbitrary decisions and called them derived facts then followed logic from those false premises or just made incorrect conclusions out of thin air from your premises.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Happyjew wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

Yea.. there are no other variables to that statement, it's X = Y. You just look dumb. We know the Variables, we know the variable is Mastery Level. We don't have to go further.

Ha ha ha. I'm confident anyone with a basic understanding of maths would not think my correct statements make me look dumb. We have 2 variables X (apples in your example, pocket money in mine, number of powers cast per turn in the rules) and Y (age, father's earnings and Mastery Level).

"X depends on Y" does not mean "X = Y". I'll try again to make you understand but I suspect you already understand and are just being stubborn as I don't believe anyone could fail to grasp such simple concepts. Again answer this question (or tell me how it differs from "X depends on Y):

A persons pocket money depends on their father's earnings.

My father earns £1,000 a week how much pocket money do I get?

Apparently £1,000 a week. Can I live with you? I can always use more cash.

Do you really believe that is the correct answer to the question? If so you really need to go back to school.

 insaniak wrote:

Kyutaru wrote:
Incorrect. We know all the answers it cannot be.

Which simply gives us a list of things it is not. That doesn't mean that the only other answer you think applies must be the correct one... it simply means that you can only think of one other answer.

Rules don't work by forcing you to eliminate all of the impossible things in order to determine what you can do. That would be ridiculous.

What's ridiculous is this thread, but I'll attempt to enlighten you anyway in the way a math teacher would. Quiz!

1) Number of powers that may be cast per turn... must it be a real number that exists?

2) Must this number be dependent on Mastery Level in some fashion?

3) Do we have permission to modify Mastery Level in any way to determine the number of powers we may cast?

4) If all modified variants of Mastery Level are ruled out due to lack of permission, are there any other values left that are still dependent on Mastery Level?

5) Do you follow yet?


Once you have completed the quiz, a grade will be assigned ranging from 1 to 5. Disclaimer: This is not golf.

We don't need to know that X = Y. 

X > Y cannot be true as we have no permission to add anything to Mastery Level per the RAW. 
X < Y cannot be true as we have no permission to subtract anything from Mastery Level per the RAW. 
X and Y are related somehow by Mastery Level, say in the equation X = n * Y (this is the equation for dependency). 
We must therefore determine what value 'n' is. 

Can you think of any number that would work? I can.

Except of course X can indeed potentially be either greater than or less than Y. Despite your claims otherwise. You have no rules that say it can be equal to ML anymore than there are rules saying it can be more or less than ML.

And this is where it all falls apart:

Kyutaru 599772 6921406 null3) wrote: Do we have permission to modify Mastery Level in any way to determine the number of powers we may cast?.

Because what we have is an incomplete rule (that the number of powers is dependant on Mastery Level, without any explanation as to how this applies) ... so any conclusion you draw, mathematically or otherwise, is based on incomplete data.

You can not state unequivocably that this is supposed to work any given way, because we do not have the complete rules to form that conclusion. Until GW get around to finishing writing the Psychic rules, the best anyone can do is guess as to how they are supposed to work.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Except of course X can indeed potentially be either greater than or less than Y. Despite your claims otherwise. You have no rules that say it can be equal to ML anymore than there are rules saying it can be more or less than ML.

40k is a permissive ruleset. If the rules do not say you can do something, then you may not do it. Please cite your permission to modify Mastery Level for the purpose of determining powers per turn. Without permission to modify mastery level, and no explanation for how it can otherwise be dependent on a psyker's Mastery Level, we are left with but a single recourse.

Example: If I ask you a question and give you the choice of answering Yes or No, you may not answer Forty-Two. It's simply not permitted by the rules of the question.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:
And this is where it all falls apart:

Kyutaru 599772 6921406 null3) wrote: Do we have permission to modify Mastery Level in any way to determine the number of powers we may cast?.

Because what we have is an incomplete rule (that the number of powers is dependant on Mastery Level, without any explanation as to how this applies) ... so any conclusion you draw, mathematically or otherwise, is based on incomplete data.

You can not state unequivocably that this is supposed to work any given way, because we do not have the complete rules to form that conclusion. Until GW get around to finishing writing the Psychic rules, the best anyone can do is guess as to how they are supposed to work.

But that is an assumption you invented. I have stated the manner in which you can determine the only possible answer. Regardless of how incomplete you feel the rule is it provides us just enough information to determine the answer DESPITE its wording.

Kyutaru wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Except of course X can indeed potentially be either greater than or less than Y. Despite your claims otherwise. You have no rules that say it can be equal to ML anymore than there are rules saying it can be more or less than ML.

40k is a permissive ruleset. If the rules do not say you can do something, then you may not do it. Please cite your permission to modify Mastery Level for the purpose of determining powers per turn. Without permission to modify mastery level, and no explanation for how it can otherwise be dependent on a psyker's Mastery Level, we are left with but a single recourse.

Example: If I ask you a question and give you the choice of answering Yes or No, you may not answer Forty-Two. It's simply not permitted by the rules of the question.

And this is not a yes/no answer.
This is a huge logical leap your making.

The dependancy isn't know.

If you want to assume it's 1:1 then fine, but please be clear that this is just your opinion/ house rule. That's all it is.

And of course there is no rule to modify the Mastery Level. But that still doesn't mean that the number of powers that can be cast is equal to Mastery level. That is pure assumption.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kyutaru wrote:
But that is an assumption you invented. I have stated the manner in which you can determine the only possible answer. Regardless of how incomplete you feel the rule is it provides us just enough information to determine the answer DESPITE its wording.

It does not. You made a logical leap, added some random bits, and made an assumption. Nothing more.

Please cite your permission to modify Mastery Level for the purpose of determining powers per turn

Please cite your permission to have the Mastery Level equal the number of powers per turn.