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.

Assuming that having permission to resolve a power according its entry, while its entry is clearly able to be applied to a model and with the understanding that when applying the effects of a rule/psychic power/whatever you are required to apply them to the full extent you are able to, gives you permission to have the effects applied is however a perfectly valid premise and the one the pro-stacking side is actually using.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Assuming that having permission to resolve a power according its entry, while its entry is clearly able to be applied to a model and with the understanding that when applying the effects of a rule/psychic power/whatever you are required to apply them to the full extent you are able to, gives you permission to have the effects applied is however a perfectly valid premise and the one the pro-stacking side is actually using.

Seems as though we may agree with the possibility of the red bit being a problem, then.

Permission to cast, is not in itself, permission to have the power take effect, even if that effect may be applicable.

 Abandon wrote:
I'll wait til you actually address my points

So you're refusing to cite permission?
Since that's the entire basis of your line of questioning I don't see the point in addressing your "points" since they have no basis in fact.
Have fun.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

jeffersonian000 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
J , careful, you appear to be deliberately misrepresenting rules again.

1) a reminder isn't a restriction, you are aware of this fact, please stop repeating an untruth.
2) page 32, dealing with special rules? Not "abilities", as you claim, disingenuously? Good job +1s isn't a special rule, but a modifier. Again, you know 32 doesn't apply - and this was proven to everyone, repeatedly. You pretending otherwise doesn't alter simple facts.

You haven't shown a requirement, in this or any other thread. You pretend to, and then ignore the refutations, just repeating the same failed argument, over and over.

Please look up to the definition for the word: Paraphrase.

SJ

Cool, so you still can't show any rules, and are happily ignoring / making things up as you want? Back on ignore

Tonberry7 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Tonberry7 wrote:
Wow, up to 10 pages now? I can't believe this argument is still going.

Seriously, you either have Hammerhand active, or you don't. It's a bit of a stretch to claim multiple castings of the same with cumulative effects.

If that's how some people want to play it, that's up to them but it tells me a lot about what type of player they are.

I'll be sticking to the rules however which give no permission for Hammerhand to stack.

The rules already given prove you to be wrong.

Stop inserting bias on others, it is really bad form, and leads to people using the Ignore function or the yellow triangle of friendship.

If that were the case this thread should have ended on page 1. If you want to ignore someone just because they don't agree with you, that's up to you.

Sigh. No, it's when people claim bias, fail to provide any actual rules, that they end up getting ignor. Not for simple disagreement

You haven't provided a single salient rule. Not a single one

Incorrect. Try reading posts more carefully.

Nope, you're still incorrect. You have simply asserted, with no rules backing.

Please abide by the tenets of this forum.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
I'll wait til you actually address my points

So you're refusing to cite permission?
Since that's the entire basis of your line of questioning I don't see the point in addressing your "points" since they have no basis in fact.
Have fun.

Permission is granted to use an available cover save.
The power gives the target a cover save and does not take it away when the power expires.
That is using the power and following the instructions in it's entry.

Unless you think there is something more to using a power and resolving it...

 Abandon wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
I'll wait til you actually address my points

So you're refusing to cite permission?
Since that's the entire basis of your line of questioning I don't see the point in addressing your "points" since they have no basis in fact.
Have fun.

Permission is granted to use an available cover save.
The power gives the target a cover save and does not take it away when the power expires.
That is using the power and following the instructions in it's entry.

Unless you think there is something more to using a power and resolving it...

As I said even if he retains the cover save the power has expired so we do not know what cover save he has as we can not reference a power that is not in effect.

Ergo the Cover save is useless once the power expires as you have nothing to reference one it does.

 Abandon wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
I'll wait til you actually address my points

So you're refusing to cite permission?
Since that's the entire basis of your line of questioning I don't see the point in addressing your "points" since they have no basis in fact.
Have fun.

Permission is granted to use an available cover save.
The power gives the target a cover save and does not take it away when the power expires.
That is using the power and following the instructions in it's entry.

Unless you think there is something more to using a power and resolving it...

The fact that the power expires means that everything the power tells you to do is no longer relevant. Therefore that cover save is no longer available and attempting to use it is cheating. Since you've failed, again, to actually cite permission, do you have anything to add to the discussion yet?

rigeld2 wrote:

 Abandon wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
I'll wait til you actually address my points

So you're refusing to cite permission?
Since that's the entire basis of your line of questioning I don't see the point in addressing your "points" since they have no basis in fact.
Have fun.

Permission is granted to use an available cover save.
The power gives the target a cover save and does not take it away when the power expires.
That is using the power and following the instructions in it's entry.

Unless you think there is something more to using a power and resolving it...

The fact that the power expires means that everything the power tells you to do is no longer relevant. Therefore that cover save is no longer available and attempting to use it is cheating. Since you've failed, again, to actually cite permission, do you have anything to add to the discussion yet?

So your saying that something causes the cover save to go away when the power expires. I don't see that in the power effects or the general blessing/malediction descriptions. Since we are not looking at the power being 'in effect' as a rules mechanic I don't see anything linking the two beyond the initial granting of the cover save.

Stealth grants a cover save if the model has the SR.
Telekine Dome grants the unit an invulnerable save while the power is in effect.
Area terrain grants a cover save as long as the model is in the terrains area.
Fire Shield grants a cover save as long as ... what? Nothing in the power description about a limit.
Limitations need to be placed in some fashion or they do not exist.

You refuse to admit the cause is not the effect.
Cause ≠ Effect
Fire Shield expires ≠ cover save expires

Limitations placed on the power are not limits placed on their effects unless those effects are specifically or by default stated as such. The general description of blessings and malediction only places limits on the power, not the powers effects.

Of course you could gather that the power must be 'in effect' on the target for any benefits/penalties of that power to be applied (as you just did)but that would be treating the power being 'in effect' as a game mechanic which you at one point allowed for and then denied. Are you changing your mind again?

Is the power being 'in effect' a game mechanic that limits the effects described in the powers entry or not?
Final answer please, I'm tired of trying to guess your position on this.

If yes, then powers need to be cumulative for multiples to be 'in effect'.
If no, effects of powers are not limited to 'while the power is in effect' unless stated.

Your choice.

Everyone's arguing about Fire Shield, and I'm just sitting here waiting for someone to answer this:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
We have permission to resolve Hammerhand according to its entry, which rule states that having a previous manifestation of Hammerhand on the unit denies that permission?

In regards to the Fire Shield debate, are there any other powers that when played by strict RAW have permanent effects?

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Everyone's arguing about Fire Shield, and I'm just sitting here waiting for someone to answer this:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
We have permission to resolve Hammerhand according to its entry, which rule states that having a previous manifestation of Hammerhand on the unit denies that permission?

In regards to the Fire Shield debate, are there any other powers that when played by strict RAW have permanent effects?

Well, if the power must be in effect for the bonus to be counted then a limitation would be set to the number of times the power can be in effect on the unit. Noncumulatively the max would be one which is the maximum quantity for anything that is not cumulative. This would result in a maximum +1S because there is one Hammerhand in effect on the unit at most.

If the power does not need to be 'in effect' for the modifier to be applied then the you skip straight to adding modifiers which undeniably are cumulative and as such would stack.

Hence the correlation to the fire shield debate.

Fire Shield is the only power know of that does not set a duration on one of it's effects. Rigeld is by all appearance attempting to tell us that the power needs to be in effect for the cover save to be used while also maintaining that we do not need to count powers as being in effect to receive their benefits/penalties. a rather impossible stance if you ask me.

Edit: He's not being verry clear on his views here though and I'm starting to suspect he is a GW writer

Direct from the Grey Knights codex: "If the psychic test is passed, all models in the unit (including independent characters) have +1 Strength until the end of the Assault Phase."

Given that wording, I'd argue that Hammerhand does go cast power -> apply modifier.

As far as Fire Shield goes, RAW seems to indicate that the cover save has no duration, but then again RAW also states Flying Monstrous Creatures have the "Relentless Smash" rule and that models wearing helmets can't draw line of sight. Can't we just agree that this is the result of another case of poor quality control when it comes to writing rules and the cover save from Fire Shield only lasts as long as Fire Shield does?

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Direct from the Grey Knights codex: "If the psychic test is passed, all models in the unit (including independent characters) have +1 Strength until the end of the Assault Phase."

Given that wording, I'd argue that Hammerhand does go cast power -> apply modifier.

As far as Fire Shield goes, RAW seems to indicate that the cover save has no duration, but then again RAW also states Flying Monstrous Creatures have the "Relentless Smash" rule and that models wearing helmets can't draw line of sight. Can't we just agree that this is the result of another case of poor quality control when it comes to writing rules and the cover save from Fire Shield only lasts as long as Fire Shield does?

Which was my interpretation of Hammerhand as well. I went so far as to say the power has no duration and is used and ends instantly. Only the modifier it provides has a duration. There is therefore no need to the power to stack as it does not even have the opportunity to do so. The modifiers, not being dependent on the power being 'in effect' are free to add up per page 2.

We could agree on that regarding Fire Shield as far as RAI or HYWPI. RAW is still RAW though.