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.

Arguments that have already been made, and refuted. Please do not use these when posting in this thread:



It's my understanding that the way most people thinks this works is as follows;



From my reading of the rules, that's wrong, and here's why;

Under multiple modifiers, we are given the example that most people think is this situation. +1 and x2. However, the rule clearly states that this is how modifiers are applied to a Model's stat. In fact, the entire section, under Model's and Units, is discussing model's characteristics.

However, Nothing in that talks about a Weapon's characteristics. For that, we are directed to the Weapons section of the book, under Strength.

Throughout the entire section, the strength of a weapon and the strength of its wielder are clearly defined as separate things. They are Not the same number, which is why a model is not allowed to make a strength check using his weapon's strength. It's not the Model's characteristic, it's the Weapon's. Using a weapon in melee just gives the model permission to use the weapon's strength and AP in place of its own.

Now, most people point out that, within this section, it refers to weapons such as +2 and x2 as 'modifiers.' And, while it does use the word 'modifier,' you'll notice that the example it gives clearly states that the modifier is being applied to the Weapon's strength.

However, Furious Charge does not modify a Weapon's strength. It modifies the model's strength characteristic.
So, in my example, we have a blood angel charging with a power fist. On the turn he charges, his strength characteristic is increased by +1. So, for the remainder of that turn, that model is str. 5. Thus, when determining the strength of the weapon he is using, a completely separate number which is in no way modified by Furious Charge, we find that it is equal to its user's strength x2, or in this case, strength 10. So, attacks he makes using the power fist are strength 10.

The attacks are made at strength 10 because 5 times 2 is 10, and the weapon's strength is equal to the model's strength (note, the words 'base' or 'unmodified' are never used when describing a weapon's strength) times 2. The models strength, on the turn he charges, is 5, because Furious Charge increases the Model's strength score (not the weapon's) by one, and the multiple modifier rule only applies to modifications of a Model's characteristics, not of a Weapon's strength, which is an entirely different number, the rules for which are given in a separate section of the book.


All of that said:
This is an interpretation based off of RAW. I openly and readily admit that the RAI, in this case, is more than open to interpretation, as the game never actually presents any wargear that outright modifies the strength characteristic of the model, despite the rules alluding to such things existing. This is not an argument that the rules should or were intended work this way, only that, as written, this is how they work.

On page 8 it mentions that modifiers from rules (like furious charge), or wargear (power fist), are worked out by multiplying then adding.

... if an Imperial Guardsman (Strength 3) attacks with a weapon with Strength ×2, his attack is Strength 6 (3×2). If he attacks with a weapon with Strength +1, his attacks are Strength 4 (3+1)

Notice how the in the weapons section of the BRB its the models strength is increasing, not the weapons.

Consult the chart above, cross-referencing the attacker's Strength characteristic with the defender’s Toughness.

Regardless, we always use the attacker's stength to wound. If your logic tracked then a weapon's strength would never matter.

On page 8 it mentions that modifiers from rules (like furious charge), or wargear (power fist), are worked out by multiplying then adding.

It does. However, those rules apply to a model's characteristics, not to a weapons strength. As I said in my OP, these rules don't apply to a weapon's strength because weapon's 1.) do not change the strength of their wielder, and 2.) have their own strength score which is separate from the wielder's own.

 DJGietzen wrote:

... if an Imperial Guardsman (Strength 3) attacks with a weapon with Strength ×2, his attack is Strength 6 (3×2). If he attacks with a weapon with Strength +1, his attacks are Strength 4 (3+1)

Notice how the in the weapons section of the BRB its the models strength is increasing, not the weapons.

You'll notice that it says his Attack's strength is six, not His strength. Which tracks, as the model is allowed to use the Weapon's strength, (which again, is a separate number from his own) when determining the strength of his attacks.

Consult the chart above, cross-referencing the attacker's Strength characteristic with the defender’s Toughness.

Regardless, we always use the attacker's stength to wound. If your logic tracked then a weapon's strength would never matter.

Except we don't... because weapons give explicit permission to the wielder to use their (the weapon's) strength in place of their (the wielder's) own. So, from my interpretation, we cross-reference the attacker's strength when checking to wound. When attacking with a weapon, the model is allowed to use the weapon's strength in place of its own when determining the wound. So, we use the weapon's strength.

Not to offend, but I fail to see which part of that is unclear.

Necroes wrote:

On page 8 it mentions that modifiers from rules (like furious charge), or wargear (power fist), are worked out by multiplying then adding.

It does. However, those rules apply to a model's characteristics, not to a weapons strength. As I said in my OP, these rules don't apply to a weapon's strength because weapon's 1.) do not change the strength of their wielder, and 2.) have their own strength score which is separate from the wielder's own.

 DJGietzen wrote:

... if an Imperial Guardsman (Strength 3) attacks with a weapon with Strength ×2, his attack is Strength 6 (3×2). If he attacks with a weapon with Strength +1, his attacks are Strength 4 (3+1)

Notice how the in the weapons section of the BRB its the models strength is increasing, not the weapons.

You'll notice that it says his Attack's strength is six, not His strength. Which tracks, as the model is allowed to use the Weapon's strength, (which again, is a separate number from his own) when determining the strength of his attacks.

Consult the chart above, cross-referencing the attacker's Strength characteristic with the defender’s Toughness.

Regardless, we always use the attacker's stength to wound. If your logic tracked then a weapon's strength would never matter.

Except we don't... because weapons give explicit permission to the wielder to use their (the weapon's) strength in place of their (the wielder's) own. So, from my interpretation, we cross-reference the attacker's strength when checking to wound. When attacking with a weapon, the model is allowed to use the weapon's strength in place of its own when determining the wound. So, we use the weapon's strength.

Not to offend, but I fail to see which part of that is unclear.

Surely weapons come under weargear?

Please look in the BRB page 40 under strength.
<edit> Ah page 8 under multiple modifiers.
I will delete the other garbage I wrote earlier.

I think the argument is moot when X2 is the value, the weapon's strength does not exist, only the "user".
If you want to use RAW perfectly, they did not reference UserX2 so it is unitless and therefore unusable which is a stupid outcome.

Colehkxix wrote:


Surely weapons come under weargear?

Weapons are wargear, yes. The rules for multiple modifiers, which is what I'm assuming you're referencing, apply to modifiers affixed by wargear, yes.

However; weapons do Not modify the characteristics of their wielder. Wielding a weapon does not change a model's strength characteristic. A space marine wielding a power fist is not a strength 8 model, it is a strength 4 model, with a strength score of 4. So, the rules for multiple modifiers do Not apply, because they Only refer to modifications of the characteristic, which is Not being modified.

Once again; a weapon's strength is a separate number, completely, from its wielder's. The only thing the wielder's strength has to do with that of his weapon, is that some weapons use the wielder's strength as the basis for determining their own. However, as the weapons rules never say you have to use the model's base strength for this, then you have to use his current strength characteristic (After all rules that Do modify the actual characteristic) when determining the weapon's strength which, again, is separate from the model's own.

 Talizvar wrote:
Please look in the BRB page 40 under strength.
<edit> Ah page 8 under multiple modifiers.
I will delete the other garbage I wrote earlier.

I think the argument is moot when X2 is the value, the weapon's strength does not exist, only the "user".
If you want to use RAW perfectly, they did not reference UserX2 so it is unitless and therefore unusable which is a stupid outcome.

Except, as I said, the weapon's strength Does exist. Page 40, first sentence under Strength,

If the weapon's strength...

Weapon's have a strength score, independent from that of the user. All weapons, both melee and ranged. These rules apply to all types.

Ok, I see what you're saying and you may be right about the two points I raised, but its kind of moot.

If the weapon confers a Strength bonus, the Strength of the weapon’s attacks is equal to that of the user after any such modifiers have been applied.

When the weapon modifies the user's strength characteristic we need to determine what that characteristic would be after any modifiers are applied before we can determine the strength of the weapon. A power fist does this.

If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values.

If there is more then one modifier to the user's STR we need to apply them in proper order.

So in the case of a power fist and furious charge combo the power fist's strength = (user strength x2)+1 for furious charge.

Try, "If the weapon confers a strength bonus..."
The sentence you reference is invalid because it is not specifically "user" but X2, a different "entry" value not the meaning: they have it in quotes for goodness sake.

Necroes wrote:

Colehkxix wrote:


Surely weapons come under weargear?

Weapons are wargear, yes. The rules for multiple modifiers, which is what I'm assuming you're referencing, apply to modifiers affixed by wargear, yes.

However; weapons do Not modify the characteristics of their wielder. Wielding a weapon does not change a model's strength characteristic. A space marine wielding a power fist is not a strength 8 model, it is a strength 4 model, with a strength score of 4. So, the rules for multiple modifiers do Not apply, because they Only refer to modifications of the characteristic, which is Not being modified.

Once again; a weapon's strength is a separate number, completely, from its wielder's. The only thing the wielder's strength has to do with that of his weapon, is that some weapons use the wielder's strength as the basis for determining their own. However, as the weapons rules never say you have to use the model's base strength for this, then you have to use his current strength characteristic (After all rules that Do modify the actual characteristic) when determining the weapon's strength which, again, is separate from the model's own.

 Talizvar wrote:
Please look in the BRB page 40 under strength.
<edit> Ah page 8 under multiple modifiers.
I will delete the other garbage I wrote earlier.

I think the argument is moot when X2 is the value, the weapon's strength does not exist, only the "user".
If you want to use RAW perfectly, they did not reference UserX2 so it is unitless and therefore unusable which is a stupid outcome.

Except, as I said, the weapon's strength Does exist. Page 40, first sentence under Strength,

If the weapon's strength...

Weapon's have a strength score, independent from that of the user. All weapons, both melee and ranged. These rules apply to all types.

If weapons do not modify the characteristic of the wielder like it says on page 8, what do they do?

With regards to page 40. It notes that you only get the strength bonus when attacking with that weapon. However this is still a modifier.

There are no other references to how modifiers should be worked out in the book, nor anything that seperates weapon modifiers from any other modifiers, from what I can see.

 DJGietzen wrote:
Ok, I see what you're saying and you may be right about the two points I raised, but its kind of moot.

If the weapon confers a Strength bonus, the Strength of the weapon’s attacks is equal to that of the user after any such modifiers have been applied.

When the weapon modifies the user's strength characteristic we need to determine what that characteristic would be after any modifiers are applied before we can determine the strength of the weapon. A power fist does this.

If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values.

If there is more then one modifier to the user's STR we need to apply them in proper order.

So in the case of a power fist and furious charge combo the power fist's strength = (user strength x2)+1 for furious charge.

Except you don't modify the model's strength. At no point is the strength of the model being changed. At no point during the game if asked 'what is the strength characteristic of that model' we answer with the weapon's strength score.

And you quoted it perfectly, 'after any such modifiers,'... from the weapon. Because a rule that clearly Does change the answer to the afford mentioned question, (because a blood angel's strength score on the charge is 5, until the end of that round, and will be that for tests, etc. until the end of the round) is clearly not one 'such modifier,' as it has nothing to do with the weapon.

So, once again, we don't need to apply Anything in a 'proper order' because there isn't one. The weapon tells you what to do. Take the model's strength characteristic, use it as a base, change the base, then you have the weapon's strength score.

Weapons do not modify a model's characteristic. They check it, to determine their own. If they Did modify it, then it would not be a separate number from the actual characteristic. A space marine with a power fist just Would be a strength 8 model, for all game purposes.

EDIT:
Again, I don't think it was intended to be this way. I think all the confusion comes from wording based on the intent to have it work as most people currently use the rule.
However, if played as written, we can Not use the rules for modifying a characteristic when determining a weapon's strength. Those rules only apply to things that change the actual score. If the model's strength is 5, it doesn't matter how its weapon determines what its own strength is, the models strength is 5.
And, because some weapons base their strength off of the wielder's, then if the wielder's strength is 5, the weapon's strength is based off 5. The rules for weapons don't distinguish between modified or unmodified model strength score. They Only refer to its strength score.
If a weapon's strength score was not a separate number from its wielder's there would be no issue. However, it Has to be a separate number, because the model uses that number in place of its own.
You Can't use something in place of something else, if they are the same thing. It doesn't work.

Necroes wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:
Ok, I see what you're saying and you may be right about the two points I raised, but its kind of moot.

If the weapon confers a Strength bonus, the Strength of the weapon’s attacks is equal to that of the user after any such modifiers have been applied.

When the weapon modifies the user's strength characteristic we need to determine what that characteristic would be after any modifiers are applied before we can determine the strength of the weapon. A power fist does this.

If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values.

If there is more then one modifier to the user's STR we need to apply them in proper order.

So in the case of a power fist and furious charge combo the power fist's strength = (user strength x2)+1 for furious charge.

Except you don't modify the model's strength. At no point is the strength of the model being changed. At no point during the game if asked 'what is the strength characteristic of that model' we answer with the weapon's strength score.

And you quoted it perfectly, 'after any such modifiers,'... from the weapon. Because a rule that clearly Does change the answer to the afford mentioned question, (because a blood angel's strength score on the charge is 5, until the end of that round, and will be that for tests, etc. until the end of the round) is clearly not one 'such modifier,' as it has nothing to do with the weapon.

So, once again, we don't need to apply Anything in a 'proper order' because there isn't one. The weapon tells you what to do. Take the model's strength characteristic, use it as a base, change the base, then you have the weapon's strength score.

Weapons do not modify a model's characteristic. They check it, to determine their own. If they Did modify it, then it would not be a separate number from the actual characteristic. A space marine with a power fist just Would be a strength 8 model, for all game purposes.

EDIT:
Again, I don't think it was intended to be this way. I think all the confusion comes from wording based on the intent to have it work as most people currently use the rule.
However, if played as written, we can Not use the rules for modifying a characteristic when determining a weapon's strength. Those rules only apply to things that change the actual score. If the model's strength is 5, it doesn't matter how its weapon determines what its own strength is, the models strength is 5.
And, because some weapons base their strength off of the wielder's, then if the wielder's strength is 5, the weapon's strength is based off 5. The rules for weapons don't distinguish between modified or unmodified model strength score. They Only refer to its strength score.
If a weapon's strength score was not a separate number from its wielder's there would be no issue. However, it Has to be a separate number, because the model uses that number in place of its own.
You Can't use something in place of something else, if they are the same thing. It doesn't work.

According to the characteristics tests section, the only score used would be the one on the unit card, not including any modifiers. No rules or wargear seems to be able to modify this base characteristic.

As far as I can tell, anything else is a modifier, and falls under the modifiers rules on page 8 to work out the final strength value.

I would prefer it if it worked the way you said though.

Colehkxix wrote:
According to the characteristics tests section, the only score used would be the one on the unit card, not including any modifiers. No rules or wargear seems to be able to modify this base characteristic.

As far as I can tell, anything else is a modifier, and falls under the modifiers rules on page 8 to work out the final strength value.

I would prefer it if it worked the way you said though.

Except the 'characteristics' section refers to the characteristics given in the model's profile. It then refers to them in the rest of the section as 'characteristics' dropping the 'in the model's' part, but still referring to the same thing, as it does not distinguish between the two.

It then goes on to speak about things that modify those characteristics. So, when something modifies a characteristic of a model, as far as the game is concerned, the model's physical profile includes any modifiers acting upon it.

Which is why weapons aren't modifiers. Because they Don't change that characteristic. To be a modifier, and thus have those rules apply, it would have to actually change the model's characteristic, as listed on its profile, from the perspective of the game's mechanics.

So, congratulations, it works the way I said it does. Good luck convincing anyone you play with of that fact. I've found it to be an absolute nightmare. I attribute that to how obvious it is that the rule is clearly Intended to work the way people play it, despite the fact that, as written, it doesn't.

Necroes wrote:

Colehkxix wrote:
According to the characteristics tests section, the only score used would be the one on the unit card, not including any modifiers. No rules or wargear seems to be able to modify this base characteristic.

As far as I can tell, anything else is a modifier, and falls under the modifiers rules on page 8 to work out the final strength value.

I would prefer it if it worked the way you said though.

Except the 'characteristics' section refers to the characteristics given in the model's profile. It then refers to them in the rest of the section as 'characteristics' dropping the 'in the model's' part, but still referring to the same thing, as it does not distinguish between the two.

It then goes on to speak about things that modify those characteristics. So, when something modifies a characteristic of a model, as far as the game is concerned, the model's physical profile includes any modifiers acting upon it.

Which is why weapons aren't modifiers. Because they Don't change that characteristic. To be a modifier, and thus have those rules apply, it would have to actually change the model's characteristic, as listed on its profile, from the perspective of the game's mechanics.

So, congratulations, it works the way I said it does. Good luck convincing anyone you play with of that fact. I've found it to be an absolute nightmare. I attribute that to how obvious it is that the rule is clearly Intended to work the way people play it, despite the fact that, as written, it doesn't.

There's no need for that last line.

Even if the weapon is applied "ontop"/"after" of the modifiers provided by rules like furious charge, it doesn't matter. The modifier order rules would come into effect.

Colehkxix wrote:

There's no need for that last line.

Even if the weapon is applied "ontop"/"after" of the modifiers provided by rules like furious charge, it doesn't matter. The modifier order rules would come into effect.

Except they wouldn't, because, as I've been saying, the modifier rules Only apply to things that modify the actual characteristic. They don't come in here because the model's characteristic does not change, so those rules don't apply.

As I've been saying, weapons do not modify strength score. Some of them use it as a base for determining their own. The modifier rules only come in when you're determining the model's score, and have no say over how to determine a weapon's strength score, which is a completely and entirely separate number from the model's strength score.

Here's the math;
X=model's strength, Y=weapon's strength.
For space marine with power fists;
Y=X*2= 4*2=8
For blood angel on the turn it charges
Y=X*2= 5*2=10
X=5 because, during the charge, the model's strength is +1 greater than it normally is, and 4+1=5.

You don't apply the modifier rules because they only help you when you have multiple modifiers in the same equation. This is Not the same equation, it is two separate equations, that are used to determine two separate numbers, namely X and Y.

Why would they be separate equations? You check for modifiers at the same time

Necroes wrote:
Except we don't... because weapons give explicit permission to the wielder to use their (the weapon's) strength in place of their (the wielder's) own. So, from my interpretation, we cross-reference the attacker's strength when checking to wound. When attacking with a weapon, the model is allowed to use the weapon's strength in place of its own when determining the wound. So, we use the weapon's strength.

No, you don't. You use the models Strength characteristic after applying any modifiers to it.
Furious Charge is a rule.
All weapons are classed as Wargear.

Both wargear and rules fall under multiple modifiers.

So the equation is the very first one you typed which is Strength = 4x2+1 = 9

You're going to have a hard time convincing people that (A) Weapons aren't classed as Wargear so don't fall under multiple modifiers and (B) you can override the basic mathematics of PEDMAS

In spite of the fact I have a lot of Power Fists and Thunder Hammers in my Blood Angels army, I have to agree with the people that are saying the PF would be Str 9 not Str 10. The modifier is added after the strength is doubled.

Frozocrone wrote:

Necroes wrote:
Except we don't... because weapons give explicit permission to the wielder to use their (the weapon's) strength in place of their (the wielder's) own. So, from my interpretation, we cross-reference the attacker's strength when checking to wound. When attacking with a weapon, the model is allowed to use the weapon's strength in place of its own when determining the wound. So, we use the weapon's strength.

No, you don't. You use the models Strength characteristic after applying any modifiers to it.
Furious Charge is a rule.
All weapons are classed as Wargear.

Both wargear and rules fall under multiple modifiers.

So the equation is the very first one you typed which is Strength = 4x2+1 = 9

You're going to have a hard time convincing people that (A) Weapons aren't classed as Wargear so don't fall under multiple modifiers and (B) you can override the basic mathematics of PEDMAS

casvalremdeikun wrote:In spite of the fact I have a lot of Power Fists and Thunder Hammers in my Blood Angels army, I have to agree with the people that are saying the PF would be Str 9 not Str 10. The modifier is added after the strength is doubled.

CrownAxe wrote:Why would they be separate equations? You check for modifiers at the same time

Again, the rule you are quoting has nothing to do with this situation. The Multiple Modifiers rule, on page 8 of the BRB does NOT apply to the strength of a weapon, only to rules and wargear that Explicity modify the model's Actual characteristics. If it does not allow me to make a check at the modified number, it is not in question here. Anyone claiming otherwise is making the argument that I can make checks at Strength 8 with Tactical Terminators.

The rules for determining a weapon's strength can be found later, on page 40, and are identified as being completely and entirely separate from the strength score of the model.
Therefore, because it is a separate number, with separate rules for how to determine it, which in no way modifies the model's Actual strength characteristic, if following the rule as written, we Must use the model's modified strength as the base when determining the weapon's separate strength score.

This is something that we covered earlier in the forum, and unless someone can prove that a weapon's strength (and this applies to all weapons, both melee and ranged) is somehow a modifier put on the model's strength characteristic, then please do not bring it up again.

And before anyone says anything, a weapon being wargear is also irrelevant, as, again, the multiple modifier rules specifically call out that they only apply to things that actually change the characteristic of the model, and not to anything else, even things that use said characteristic as a basis to determine some other number.

EDIT:
To clarify again, I am not saying that this is the way the rules were intended, nor that they should be played this way. I am only stating that this is how they operate, as written.

Page 50 says you cross reference the attacker's strength against the target toughness. It also says some weapons give the attacker a strength bonus. So the way it works is the powerfist is affecting your characteristic, but only for the to wound part of the fight subphase. You dont have permission to use it outside of this time which is why you cant use it for characteristic tests.

 HANZERtank wrote:
Page 50 says you cross reference the attacker's strength against the target toughness. It also says some weapons give the attacker a strength bonus. So the way it works is the powerfist is affecting your characteristic, but only for the to wound part of the fight subphase. You dont have permission to use it outside of this time which is why you cant use it for characteristic tests.

This rule has already been discussed. As mentioned previously, the rules under weapons clearly give the wielder permission to use its strength in place of the their own when making attacks.

As the wording 'in place of their own' would imply, the weapon's strength is separate from the wielder's. Even though you would "normally" check the target's toughness against the attacker's strength, using a weapon gives you permission to use the weapon's strength instead.

And, because we are using the number 'in place of' the model's strength characteristic, it's quite clear that the model's strength characteristic is not involved when using a weapon to make attacks. So, you Still aren't modifying the characteristic, so you Still can't invoke the multiple modifiers rule.

In fact the multiple modifiers rules explicitly deals with this exact situation.

Also you've fabricated rules out of thin air, not once in the Strength, or even in the Weapons section does it say you can use the weapons strength in place of the models.

Necroes wrote:


From my reading of the rules, that's wrong, and here's why;

Yea, that is not how it works, so 4X2+1 =9 as per multiple modifiers...

The models stat is X2 with a power fist when attacking...

"For example, if an Imperial Guardsman (Strength 3) attacks with a weapon with Strength ×2, his attack is Strength 6 (3×2). If he attacks with a weapon with Strength +1, his attacks are Strength 4 (3+1)." (Weapons chapter, Strength section).

This shows explicitly what the models attack strength is. This is indisputable.

So yea, sorry, your argument is not correct.

 Frozocrone wrote:
In fact the multiple modifiers rules explicitly deals with this exact situation.

Also you've fabricated rules out of thin air, not once in the Strength, or even in the Weapons section does it say you can use the weapons strength in place of the models.

The example you're referring to describes a situation in which the model's final strength characteristic would be 9. So, the actual strength score of the model, as listed in its profile, for all other rules within the game, would be 9, in that situation. Nothing in that discusses weapons, so it does not apply.

And it's not a fabrication, simply a shortened term. The rules refer specifically to 'attacks made with a weapon,' and 'weapon's attacks.' These are separate from attacks made by the wielder on his own. Admittedly, I should have been saying 'strength of attacks made with this weapon,' all this time, instead of shortening it to 'weapon's strength,' but that doesn't change the fact that attacks made with a weapon do not use the strength of the wielder, but instead use their own, separate strength value, which is defined in the weapon's profile. Some of those weapon's strength values are based off of their wielder's strength characteristic, but the strength of a weapon is still separate from the wielder. Lasguns are strength=3, bolters' str.=4, and powerfists' str=user's strengthx2.
Again, separate equations are involved. One to determine the wielder's strength, and one for the weapon's.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Necroes wrote:


From my reading of the rules, that's wrong, and here's why;

Yea, that is not how it works, so 4X2+1 =9 as per multiple modifiers...

The models stat is X2 with a power fist when attacking...

"For example, if an Imperial Guardsman (Strength 3) attacks with a weapon with Strength ×2, his attack is Strength 6 (3×2). If he attacks with a weapon with Strength +1, his attacks are Strength 4 (3+1)." (Weapons chapter, Strength section).

This shows explicitly what the models attack strength is. This is indisputable.

So yea, sorry, your argument is not correct.

What part of that proves what I've been saying wrong? Everything you've done is just what I've said you're not supposed to do. However, you've not actually proven that you Should do it that way. You've just flatly stated that that's how it is done, without disproving any of the reasons I've stated as to why it shouldn't be done that way. Come up with an actual argument, please, or I have no reason to recognize any of your future posts, because this one is just childish, for lack of a better word.
And I say 'childish' because you've basically pointed at a random page in the rule book and yelled 'Nuh-uh! See?' without actually explaining anything... like a child would.

Necroes wrote:
but that doesn't change the fact that attacks made with a weapon do not use the strength of the wielder, but instead use their own, separate strength value,

This is incorrect, because a weapon with X2 str is Str user X2...

"If the weapon confers a Strength bonus, the Strength of the weapon’s attacks is equal to that of the user after any such modifiers have been applied." (Weapons chapter, Strength section).

A power fist confers a Strength bonus and it has a modifier.

So it uses the models str to determine the value...

Again, your argument is not valid.

Necroes wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
In fact the multiple modifiers rules explicitly deals with this exact situation.

Also you've fabricated rules out of thin air, not once in the Strength, or even in the Weapons section does it say you can use the weapons strength in place of the models.

The example you're referring to describes a situation in which the model's final strength characteristic would be 9. So, the actual strength score of the model, as listed in its profile, for all other rules within the game, would be 9, in that situation. Nothing in that discusses weapons, so it does not apply.

And it's not a fabrication, simply a shortened term. The rules refer specifically to 'attacks made with a weapon,' and 'weapon's attacks.' These are separate from attacks made by the wielder on his own. Admittedly, I should have been saying 'strength of attacks made with this weapon,' all this time, instead of shortening it to 'weapon's strength,' but that doesn't change the fact that attacks made with a weapon do not use the strength of the wielder, but instead use their own, separate strength value, which is defined in the weapon's profile. Some of those weapon's strength values are based off of their wielder's strength characteristic, but the strength of a weapon is still separate from the wielder. Lasguns are strength=3, bolters' str.=4, and powerfists' str=user's strengthx2.
Again, separate equations are involved. One to determine the wielder's strength, and one for the weapon's..

Actually no, you're wrong in that sense. You can only use the x2 profile when you actually use it, which would be in combat. Any other time you would be S4, unless you had other modifiers (such as being Enfeebled).

The only time you'll use a defined weapons strength is when it's explicitly stated to have a set strength, such as Boltgun = S4, or Seige Drills from the previous SM Codex (S9).

Your argument that weapons have a separate strength is fundamentally flawed. Because if you're not using the models Strength to double, then you're doubling zero. Which would be 0 x 2 = 0.

On the other hand, if you base it off the models characteristic, then you must be modifying it somehow. Which leads us back to multiple modifiers and how multiplication comes before adding.

You see, Furious Charge doesn't permanently modify the base characteristic. If that were the case, then yeah, it would be S5 when it comes to applying the Power Fist so in that case it would be S10. But you apply Furious Charge the same time you apply the Power Fist and follow Multiple Mods.

Necroes wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
Please look in the BRB page 40 under strength.
<edit> Ah page 8 under multiple modifiers.
I will delete the other garbage I wrote earlier.
I think the argument is moot when X2 is the value, the weapon's strength does not exist, only the "user".
If you want to use RAW perfectly, they did not reference UserX2 so it is unitless and therefore unusable which is a stupid outcome.

Except, as I said, the weapon's strength Does exist. Page 40, first sentence under Strength,

If the weapon's strength...

Weapon's have a strength score, independent from that of the user. All weapons, both melee and ranged. These rules apply to all types.

 Talizvar wrote:
Try, "If the weapon confers a strength bonus..."
The sentence you reference is invalid because it is not specifically "user" but X2, a different "entry" value not the meaning: they have it in quotes for goodness sake.

Never saw this replied to.
The sentence your argument hinges on you depend on it being inclusive to all weapons when it is specifically "exclusive" to the types that have "user" under strength in their entry NOT "X2".
The only rule that would allow the weapon to have a strength at all is the multiple modifier.

Just to put this into another context, the older versions of the BRB specifically called out power fists as part of the modifiers rules and stated they were multiplication first, then addition.


Even if it doesnt state it as directly now, its pretty clear that they had no good reason to change that this edition.

Do we actually have someone arguing here that GW have hidden a super secret rule in the book, given two examples that were deliberately badly worded enough to be ambiguous so that they could force through a change to a mechanic (which IIRC has has been identical since 3rd) all to the first person to spot it?

I know their rule writing has taken a dip lately but isn't that pushing it?

random_man wrote:
Do we actually have someone arguing here that GW have hidden a super secret rule in the book, given two examples that were deliberately badly worded enough to be ambiguous so that they could force through a change to a mechanic (which IIRC has has been identical since 3rd) all to the first person to spot it?

I know their rule writing has taken a dip lately but isn't that pushing it?

After reading Age of Sigmar, this may only be the beginning...