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.

Hey Dakka!

I have a quick question. I had a game a while ago against a force of Nurgle Chaos Daemons. My opponent rolled on Biomancy and got Enfeeble multiple times, which allowed him to make my Green Tide completely useless. Now, I had forgotten all about this battle until recently, when Maledictions came up in a discussion with a few friends.

Long story short, I'm wondering if Enfeeble can actually be stacked. With Blessings it's specified that the same blessing can't be stacked on the unit over and over again, but different blessings are fine. The wording under Malediction in the rulebook (pg. 27) also mentions different maledictions, but I don't know if this means different powers, or simply the same power from a different source?

Help me out with this! I'm not looking for vengeance against my opponent, but I would like to know how badly this actually counters that list of mine.

Thanks in advance!

No, the only permission to stack the effects is from different powers. Two different instances of the same power is not two different powers.

This again already - really ?

:(

I agree with Gietzen, you can not stack the same debuff on the same unit.

 DJGietzen wrote:
No, the only permission to stack the effects is from different powers. Two different instances of the same power is not two different powers.

Unless mistaken, permission comes from multiple modifiers, which we undoubtedly have, and the requirement in the psychic powers section to resolve the power. Show denial.

To OP: strict rules, it applies.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Unless mistaken, permission comes from multiple modifiers, which we undoubtedly have, and the requirement in the psychic powers section to resolve the power. Show denial.

To OP: strict rules, it applies.

Agree with this.

Compare the wording for Blessings:

"The benefit of any one particular blessing can only be gained once per unit per turn, but benefits from different blessings are cumulative."

With the wording for Maledictions:

"Note that bonuses and penalties from different maledictions are always cumulative..."

There is no restriction against the same Maledictions stacking as there is for Blessings. If they had intended it to be otherwise it would have been written so.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Unless mistaken, permission comes from multiple modifiers, which we undoubtedly have, and the requirement in the psychic powers section to resolve the power. Show denial.

To OP: strict rules, it applies.

Agree with this.

Compare the wording for Blessings:

"The benefit of any one particular blessing can only be gained once per unit per turn, but benefits from different blessings are cumulative."

With the wording for Maledictions:

"Note that bonuses and penalties from different maledictions are always cumulative..."

There is no restriction against the same Maledictions stacking as there is for Blessings. If they had intended it to be otherwise it would have been written so.

Wow. I wasn't aware of the difference in wording. I always assumed that maledictions were bound by the same limitations that blessings were. Now I have to go read my rulebook a little more closely to make sure I understand it correctly.

Stack 10 or 20 Enfeebles, the result is still the same. While a unit is Enfeebled, it suffers -1 S/T.

Fragile wrote:
Stack 10 or 20 Enfeebles, the result is still the same. While a unit is Enfeebled, it suffers -1 S/T.

Out of curiosity, what is it about the wording of enfeeble that makes it not cumulative?

 NightHowler wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Stack 10 or 20 Enfeebles, the result is still the same. While a unit is Enfeebled, it suffers -1 S/T.

Out of curiosity, what is it about the wording of enfeeble that makes it not cumulative?

Nothing. If you treat two different instances of enfeeble as two different powers the effects will be cumulative as the unit will be under the effects of two different powers.

Now, I still don't see permission for effects from the one particular malediction (or psychic power in general) to be cumulative. The multiple modifiers section of the rule does not grant this permission. It only informs us what to do if we have multiple modifiers. With out permission for the second casting of enfeeble to effect the unit, we only have the one modifier to contend with.

The line in the blessings is actually what solidifies my opinion. With out that line what constitutes a 'differnt power' would be vague. The fact that the game distinguishes between multiple manifestations of one particular power and different powers tells me that a different power is not just a different manifestation.

Did they intend for the effects one particular malediction to be able to be gained more then once per turn? Perhaps, but that's not written down anywhere nor made clear enough to me through context.

 DJGietzen wrote:
Nothing. If you treat two different instances of enfeeble as two different powers the effects will be cumulative as the unit will be under the effects of two different powers.

Now, I still don't see permission for effects from the one particular malediction (or psychic power in general) to be cumulative. The multiple modifiers section of the rule does not grant this permission. It only informs us what to do if we have multiple modifiers. With out permission for the second casting of enfeeble to effect the unit, we only have the one modifier to contend with.

The line in the blessings is actually what solidifies my opinion. With out that line what constitutes a 'differnt power' would be vague. The fact that the game distinguishes between multiple manifestations of one particular power and different powers tells me that a different power is not just a different manifestation.

Did they intend for the effects one particular malediction to be able to be gained more then once per turn? Perhaps, but that's not written down anywhere nor made clear enough to me through context.

(Emphasis mine)

as for the underlined text above:

Except we do have permission to cast enfeeble on a unit that has an enfeeble already in effect. So there is your permission to cast two enfeeble powers.

Now, for them not to stack you would need to find something denying this permission.

DJ - we have permission. We are told to resolve it. We can resolve -1T, and have rules on how to apply multiple modifiers

Youre cart before horse again. General permission is proven and utterly clear. Find denial of this permission, or accept that this is true.

If 2 psychers in same the unit can't cast the same power twice, then why should you resolve the same power twice as if it were different?

Sorceror 1 casts Enfeeble from Unit 1 onto Unit A
Sorceror 2 may not cast Enfeeble from unit 1 onto Unit A (or any other unit) because it's the same power. We have established that Enfeeble is the same malediction regardless of being manifested from a different caster.

Sorceror 3 Casts Enfeeble from Unit 2 onto Unit A.

It's still the same malediction, just from a different source, so why should this now be treated as a different malediction? Given that it's the same malediction, it should not stack.

@Drasius, they are not suggesting the 2nd enfeeble is a different power. What they are suggesting is that there is no requirement for a specific permission for two instances of the same power to stack because the framework for resoving psychic powers inharently allows multiple instanes of the same piwer to stack. For them not to stack you would need specific denail. Blessings have such a denail but maledictions do not.

The part that throws me is the bit about how unless stated otherwise different powers stack. To me that infers a normal state where the same powers do not stack but thats me inerting something into the rules. Nos and reaper are correct. Removing that statement dosnt change the rules. It holds no real value other then to be the basis of faulty reasoning on my part.

Reasoning based off implication is not inherently faulty - its just here that is all it can be.

The psyker rules are a mess in general, so when it comes to how I play it Im fairly relaxed either way - its never a power I use, for a start

 DJGietzen wrote:
@Drasius, they are not suggesting the 2nd enfeeble is a different power. What they are suggesting is that there is no requirement for a specific permission for two instances of the same power to stack because the framework for resoving psychic powers inharently allows multiple instanes of the same piwer to stack. For them not to stack you would need specific denail. Blessings have such a denail but maledictions do not.

The part that throws me is the bit about how unless stated otherwise different powers stack. To me that infers a normal state where the same powers do not stack but thats me inerting something into the rules. Nos and reaper are correct. Removing that statement dosnt change the rules. It holds no real value other then to be the basis of faulty reasoning on my part.

Ah, I see. My bad.

I think our group will still be ruling that it doesn't stack, however. There would be no reason for the "different" part of "Note that bonuses and penalties from different maledictions are always cumulative..." line if you could stack the same malediction. Still, I can see how if you were a RAW junkie that you'd argue the case.

No-one likes getting hit with multiple withers in fantasy either, and that certainly feels like an oversight.

The Note, is simply a reminder is all.

GW has rules that are redundant all over the BRB

Done to death, we're not doing it again.