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.

They are still modifiers as a) it was not errata and b) that is how the BRB defines them.

That *particular* stat is no longer a modifier as you are told it alters the characteristic. Applying that to the other stats, without the same reasoning being valid, is not a valid logical conclusion.

Yes, unutterably sloppy, and I wouldnt play it that way (mainly as I want an easy life, and compensate for GW idiocy as a matter of course) but those are the rules - the Strength modifier remains such.

I am more than willing to concede that they are by definition Modifiers(I really should have stated this in my last post), but when one is using the GW FAQ, and is using the alteration of T as not a modifier than one should also use the alteration of Attacks and S as non-modifiers as well.

What GW should have done was have the Item Set the stats for T, and possibly S to a value of 5. Only 3 models can take a thunderwolf mount and all 3 have a Base S and T of 4. This would have alleviated all our current problems.

As far as the Logic to it goes: Say you are Shown two L shaped Boxes; you are then told three things:
1) In 5 minutes an apple will fall out of the upper chamber into the base of the L.
2) there may or may not be an apple in the Base of the L already.
3) both boxes are identically filled
You are then asked to tell the observer how many apples are in the box. So you give an answer of 1(2), 1 possibly 2
Then someone comes in and tells you that the box on the left has an apple in the base already, so will certainly have 2.
You can then logically assume based on the given data that both boxes will have 2 apples in them(and possibly a dead cat that will not exist until the box is opened)

The ruling in the FAQ is arbitrary and against RAW; but the logical conclusion is that the S bonus should be arbitrarily rewarded even against RAW as well(again so long as you are using the FAQ).

Another look at the Arbitrary rulings on the FAQ where thunderwolves are concerned is that Canis and T-wolf Cav both lose their rending ability on attacks with special CCWs; neither has a Thunderwolf Mount(although Canis almost does as his wargear list Fangir, and Fangir claims himself to be a particularly large T-Wolf mount, with the bonuses already included).

Actually Looking to Canis's profile further shows Phil Kelly's intent in that Canis has the modifiers for a Thunderwolf mount in his profile, but does not have any parentheticals (although that could be because Fangir is "special").

I have pointed out in the past all the weapons and wargear that modifies a characteristic and how the TWM changes a profile. This argument will continue to go on and on because some individuals are going to continue looking not at the new profile of a TWM/Wolf Lord combined, but instead tunnel vision on the +1STR, +1Toughness, and +1Attack and keep shouting, "CHARACTERISTIC MODIFIED!!"

It does not matter one lick of difference that the FAQ only addressed Instant Death. It only matters that it shows you the process of how the TWM changes the profile. I have said this before,

If I am told to place 3 playing cards on a table, exactly the same way and am then told to place one of those cards face up, to fulfill the first requirement of placing them on the table in exactly the same way, I MUST place the last two card face up as well.

The TWM entry tells you to add +1T, +1STR, and +1Attack to the profile, exactly the same way. The FAQ tells you exactly how to apply the +1T to the profile. To fulfill the requirement by the TWM, you MUST add the +1str and +1Attack exactly like you applied the +1T.

Exactly - the SW codex is *horribly* written in places, these mounts being one such place.

Your L shapes doesnt work because each stat is different, and has different constraints on it - for example A CAN go above 10, S, T etc CANNOT. All the FAQ should do is state that ,for X reason T is not considered a modifier as far as ID is concerned - which is all it needs, and all ID asks for, exactly the same as with Necrons - and that the Strength bonus is included before considering other effects.

They could also have made the same entry as C: Chaos Daemons, and simply listed the entire revised profile. Much simpler.

Ok a few things. For one, the S9 Thunderhammer argument can only be applied to an IC that purchases the mount as the Thunderwolf cavalry entry doesn't list the Thunderwolf as a piece of wargear or upgrade, so for the one member in a unit that can purchase a Thunderhammer in a Thunderwolf cavalry unit, his/her strength would be 5/10 as the profile indicates that it's Strength 5 base.

I have a hard time seeing why this is a point of contention. In the Codex, the entry below Thunderwolf Cavalry is the Swift Biker Pack which clearly illustrates the Toughness change with a 4(5) where as the Thunderwolf Cavalry entry shows it as 5 and 5 as the Strength and Toughness, so if the writer intended it to be 4(5) and 4(5), he would have typed it up as such.

If you're wanting to argue that a Wolf Lord is S9 with a Thunderhammer and Thunderwolf mount, that's fine, but it seems like a silly argument when he's mounted next to his Thunderwolf Cavalry brother whose also carrying a Thunderhammer at S10.

hmasterwheel - mainly because the rules dont work like that.

Instant death rules state, very very clearly, that modifiers to T are ignored *unless* the modifer specifically states otherwise. In otherwords, it has to be worded like Destroyer Body in the Necron codex.

By saying "+1T" you are 1) applying a modifer to T and 2) the modifier does not mention it works against ID, so it doesnt.

Whihc is why the FAQ was "needed" (an errata would have been better, to make it not a house rule) - without it the TWM Lord is T4(5), with it he is T5

Trouble is that they only bothered to correct Toughness, so currently the +1S is still a modifier, and like Furious CHarge is therefore S8(9) when wirlding powerfists and their ilk.

nosferatu1001 wrote:hmasterwheel - mainly because the rules dont work like that.

Instant death rules state, very very clearly, that modifiers to T are ignored *unless* the modifer specifically states otherwise. In otherwords, it has to be worded like Destroyer Body in the Necron codex.

By saying "+1T" you are 1) applying a modifer to T and 2) the modifier does not mention it works against ID, so it doesnt.

Whihc is why the FAQ was "needed" (an errata would have been better, to make it not a house rule) - without it the TWM Lord is T4(5), with it he is T5

Trouble is that they only bothered to correct Toughness, so currently the +1S is still a modifier, and like Furious CHarge is therefore S8(9) when wirlding powerfists and their ilk.

Nos, I'm saying the argument about the Wolf Lord with a thunderhammer and thunderwolf mount at S9 is fine to make as the FAQ does leave an opening for it. I just find the argument silly as the Thunderwolf Cavalry model with the Thunderhammer is S10 by RAW.

Irdiumstern wrote:Furious Charge only changes the characteristic temporarily, while the Thunderwolf mount permanently changes the profile. The Thunderwolf Cavalry entry also lists the models as Str 5 T 5, not Str 4(5).

So is a Blood Angel with a power fist S10 when charging into assault? That would be just great!

G

Black Blow Fly wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:Furious Charge only changes the characteristic temporarily, while the Thunderwolf mount permanently changes the profile. The Thunderwolf Cavalry entry also lists the models as Str 5 T 5, not Str 4(5).

So is a Blood Angel with a power fist S10 when charging into assault? That would be just great!

G

No, because Furious Charge is a Temporary modifier to the characteristic, not a change to the profile.

The difference between modifiers and profile change is in the wording which some refuse to acknowledge.

TWM add to the profile.

Frost Blade, FC, Relic, etc, etc add to the characteristic.

I don't see what the problem is when it is specifies adding to a profile versus adding to the characteristic.

Again, TWM adds to the profile. Yes characteristics are being modified, but by being added to the PROFILE.

Frost Blades, FC, Relic, etc etc, add to the characteristic. The are not added to the profile, they are added specifically to the characteristic. Characteristics are being modified by adding to the characteristic, NOT the profile.

That is purely a semantical viewpoint. I think if GW wanted pure S5 versus S5/4 they would have said so in the FAQ as they did for toughness. That is just my opinion though.

G

Gwar! wrote:

Black Blow Fly wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:Furious Charge only changes the characteristic temporarily, while the Thunderwolf mount permanently changes the profile. The Thunderwolf Cavalry entry also lists the models as Str 5 T 5, not Str 4(5).

So is a Blood Angel with a power fist S10 when charging into assault? That would be just great!

G

No, because Furious Charge is a Temporary modifier to the characteristic, not a change to the profile.

Such an easy concept yet people cannot tell the difference.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Black Blow Fly wrote:That is purely a semantical viewpoint. I think if GW wanted pure S5 versus S5/4 they would have said so in the FAQ as they did for toughness. That is just my opinion though.

G

Why would they need too? The FAQ question was only in regard to ID. Granted it shows us exactly how the TWM adds to the profile, but if the questions was about ID, why would STR be included for no reason. As it stands right now, there is more then enough evidence in the wargear options and the TWM that shows there is a difference between adding to a profile and modifying a characteristic.

Brother Ramses wrote:The difference between modifiers and profile change is in the wording which some refuse to acknowledge.

RAW there is no difference between "add +1 Strength to the profile" and "gains +1 Strength", they're both covered by page 7's rules on modifying characteristics.

Yet some people continue to rally behind RAI claims that they're different.

solkan wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:The difference between modifiers and profile change is in the wording which some refuse to acknowledge.

RAW there is no difference between "add +1 Strength to the profile" and "gains +1 Strength", they're both covered by page 7's rules on modifying characteristics.

Yet some people continue to rally behind RAI claims that they're different.

The are different by your own inclusion of "profile". That is the key difference because page 7 on multiple modifiers it not once addresses changes to profile so therefore you do not apply them to profile changes, ONLY characteristic changes. You can not blanket statement a characteristic change to a profile change because nothing tells you to do that at all. You are saying because there is characteristic changes IN a profile change that multiple modifiers kicks in however you are wrong. You are too far reaching in using the multiple modifiers rule that deals with characteristic changes by applying it to a profile change. Nothing tells you to take that step beyond characteristic changes and apply it to profile changes.

Brother Ramses, if you can show how you can add +1 Strength to the profile without modifying the characteristic, then you will have shown that page seven doesn't apply.

Edit: Because I may have been unclear: In order to add +1 Strength to the profile, you need to modify the Strength characteristic in the profile. That's why page seven kicks in.

BR - As solkan said; a profile is made up of characteristics, what else are you adding +1 to other than a characteristic?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Exactly - the SW codex is *horribly* written in places, these mounts being one such place.

Your L shapes doesnt work because each stat is different, and has different constraints on it - for example A CAN go above 10, S, T etc CANNOT. All the FAQ should do is state that ,for X reason T is not considered a modifier as far as ID is concerned - which is all it needs, and all ID asks for, exactly the same as with Necrons - and that the Strength bonus is included before considering other effects.

They could also have made the same entry as C: Chaos Daemons, and simply listed the entire revised profile. Much simpler.

Not entirely true for the Attacks Characteristic. the Base Characteristic still cannot go above 10, that is to say if you had several items of wargear and special rules that permanently added to the Base A characteristic 10 is still your cap. However GW has stated (in the Chaos FAQ) that Bonus attacks could be granted allowing you to go over 10 Attacks because those a temporary modifiers that immediately expire upon completion of your CC attack I step.

I was actually prepared for this bit of the discussion because if you are playing with the FAQ then all 3 Characteristics in the Profile are permanent changes, that said if a piece of enemy wargear or unit special rule decreed that the model facing that rule/wargear cannot gain any bonus attacks for any reason(e.g. charging, 2 weapons, daemon weapons, etc) the Thunder wolf mounted character still gets his +1A for the mount.

I wholly concur they are modifications to the stat; however the FAQ states they are permanent additions to the base stat, not a "temporary" modifier.

As to the but profile and Characteristic changes are different; I sort of agree. A Profile is the list and order of the Characteristics, and to modify a Profile(or parts of a Profile) is to modify the characteristics therein. However; The Profile is also the list of the Base Characteristics and therefore to modify the characteristics within the profile is to "set" the base characteristics to the newly modified values, thus leaving us with a new "base" characteristic to have modified in other ways(such as a lord on a T-Wolf Mount with a Frost blade/axe)

solkan wrote:Brother Ramses, if you can show how you can add +1 Strength to the profile without modifying the characteristic, then you will have shown that page seven doesn't apply.

Edit: Because I may have been unclear: In order to add +1 Strength to the profile, you need to modify the Strength characteristic in the profile. That's why page seven kicks in.

The TWM does exactly that. It tells you to add +1STR, +1T, and +1Attack to the profile. It doesn't say add +1 Strength to close combat attacks. It doesn't say add +1 to the rider's Strength. It doesn't say attacks are resolved at +1Str. It says add to the PROFILE!

A character with a Thunderwolf Mount has the unit type of cavalry, adds +1 Strength, +1 Toughness, and +1 Attack to his profile, and has the Rending special rule in close combat.

You are inferring that because a profile change consists of changes to characteristics, that is falls under page 7 which is incorrect.

If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that both add to and multiple one of its characteristics, first multiple the basic value and then add the extra points.

This rule has has absolutely no bearing on a profile change, it only applies to a characteristic change. Here are prime examples of characteristic changes:

"Regardless of what they look like, all frost blades or frost axes are power weapons that add +1 to the user's Strength."

"In a turn they assaulted into combat, they add +1 to both their Initiative and Strength characteristics when attacking in close combat )note that this has no effect on the Initiative tests for sweeping advances)."

"Bike riders benefit from the protection offered by their bike, which increases their Toughness characteristic by 1."

"This is a master-crafted power weapon that also allows the wielder to strike at Strength 6 in close combat."

"Each Servo-arm grants the model a single extra close combat attack, made separately at Initative 1 and Strength 8, ignoring Armor Saves."

"If the coup de grâce hits, it is resolved at a Strength of 6 and causes Instant Death, regardless of the wounded model's Toughness."

"A relic blade counts as a power weapon whose hits are resolved at Strength 6."

"Corbulo's close combat attacks are made at Strength 5 and have the Rending special rule."

"Hits from Blood Reaver are resolved at Strength 8 and have the Rending special rule."

"The Eagle grants Cortez +1 Iniatative and +1 Attack (included above) and does not count toward the allowed number of Henchmen, nor does it take up any additional space in a Transport vehicle."

"When rolling to wound in close combat, the Black Templars add +1 to their Strength."

"Space Marine Bikes are fitted with twin-linked bolters and increase the rider's Toughness by +1 point."

"The Black Sword is a power weapon that adds +2 to the Emperor's Champion's Strength."

Notice the distinct lack of "profile change" of these examples I pulled up. How about we take a look at what is a profile change?

"The direct affects of this in the game are to give Fabius two extra Attacks and +1 Strength (included in his profile) and confers the Feel no Pain special rule."

"Models with the Mark of Khorne gain +1 Attack." pg 36, Mark of Khorne (included in profile)

"Models with the Mark of Tzeentch gain +1 to their Invulnerable save (to maximum of 2+). pg 37 Invulnerable save (including Mark of Tzeentch)

"Models with the Mark of Nurgle gain +1 Toughness." pg 38, Mark of Nurgle (included in profile) **while also incorporating bike rule on Toughness.

"Models with the Mark of Slaanesh gain +1 Initiative." pg 39, Mark of Slaanesh (included in profile)

So to those that are saying that a profile change is exactly the same as a characteristic change, here are RAW examples that you are wrong. I am not proposing that what is good in one codex is good for another, but proving that there is indeed a difference between characteristic changes and profile changes throughout 40k.









Automatically Appended Next Post:
I want to specifically point out this example again,

"The direct affects of this in the game are to give Fabius two extra Attacks and +1 Strength (included in his profile) and confers the Feel no Pain special rule."

Fabius Bile's entry does not have STR4(5). It is a straight up STR5 because it tells you that the +1STR is included in his PROFILE. It doesn't say +1 to his Strength characteristic. It doesn't say his attacks are made at +1STR. It doesn't say his weapon hits at +1STR. It says "...and +1 Strength (included in his profile)..."!!

How could you possibly tell me that the TWM entry where it tells you to add +1STR to the PROFILE does not make it STR5?

It is quite clear that there is a RAW difference between changing a characteristic and changing a profile as presented above.

I'm sorry but that was just too much information. There is no way rules should ever be this complex to understand.

G

You're the one who wanted the most exact explaination.

I have provided my own, thank you. Seriously though I understand the whole point is about the discussion of rules. It's always been my opinion that the most succinct responses are the best... Just like Occam's razor.

If you think about it SW are top tier, S9 versus S10 is not that big of a deal. Sure at S9 you can't insta gib units like Warbosses or opposing Thunderwolves, it's one less point for armor penetration versus vehicles. This is not going to make or break SW. Most everything else you are still wounding in a 2+ and insta gibbing units without immunity to instant death (i.e., Eternal Warriors). Space Wolves have access to Arjac if you feel you need a character with a S10 attack in close combat, no one can refute that either.

G

Are you saying that you'll rule that Wolf Lords with TWM are S4, and your reason is that SW are good enough regardless? That's preposterous.

If you want succinct, TWMs modify the profile. Six words.

bit off topic but am I the only one who saw that (4+1)*2 != 9 XD

Brother Ramses wrote:It is quite clear that there is a RAW difference between changing a characteristic and changing a profile as presented above.

That's a nice list of characteristic modifying rules, and rules which ignore a characteristic or replace it with something else. It's quite clear that you think there should be a rules difference between changing a characteristic and changing a profile.

In order for there to be a RAW difference between how "add +1 Strength to the profile" and "add +1 Strength" or whatever variant you'd like, that requires a written rule to exist making that distinction. The content in your post amounts to a survey of "Here's a bunch of places where they didn't use 'profile' and here's a few places that they did." While noting that difference is nice, it doesn't demonstrate that the particular difference actually means what you claim that it does.

LordofHats wrote: bit off topic but am I the only one who saw that (4+1)*2 != 9 XD

It's apparently one of the perks of being a game designer to be able to thumb one's nose at the normal ordering and say that (4+1)*2=9 whenever you want it to.

BR - The profile is a list of characteristics. When you alter the profile you *have* to alter the characteristic. Meaning Page 7 applies.

Good job with the list that doesnt actuallyt "prove" what you say it does.

KKel - actually it is in the 5th ed rulebook (Attacks above 10) - it still doesnt alter that you cannot conflate all changes as being to the same "L shape", as Attacks is quantitatively different to the others - regardless of it being a temporary alteration it *is* a different Characteristic to S or T.

LordofHats wrote: bit off topic but am I the only one who saw that (4+1)*2 != 9 XD

Meanwhile, you'll note that (4*2) + 1 = 9. Which is the entire point of this debate.

nosferatu1001 wrote:BR - The profile is a list of characteristics. When you alter the profile you *have* to alter the characteristic. Meaning Page 7 applies.

Good job with the list that doesnt actuallyt "prove" what you say it does.

KKel - actually it is in the 5th ed rulebook (Attacks above 10) - it still doesnt alter that you cannot conflate all changes as being to the same "L shape", as Attacks is quantitatively different to the others - regardless of it being a temporary alteration it *is* a different Characteristic to S or T.

So my space marine sergeant's powerfist is resolved at S4? (0 (he has no innate strength given) * 2) + 4 (the modifier from his profile) = 4

Uh, no. Where did I say his profile strength was a modifier?

Profile = set of characteristics. Not difficult

So a model with S5 in its profile will have a S10 powerfist?

Basically if you were writing your army list with all the stats included one would for a TWM guy write "...S5 T5..." as the profile has been modified whereas for a SCB(Swiftclaw Biker) one would write "...S4 T4 (+1 for bike)".