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.

Hi there, I am stuck on an interpretation of Magnus's rules in the new thousand sons codex. It appears he knows 9 powers from one interpretation of the rules, up from 3 in the index. I think i am reading the rules wrong or if i am not, how has he remained the same cost?

I dont have the rules, but i guess he can choose from 10 powers, his datasheet will tell you how much different powers he can use per game. In the index i think he „knows smite and three more psychic powers“.

I think he also lost some kind of reroll 1s in his new rules.

It's a dubious interpretation of this sentence:

"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101) and/or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

Daedalus81 wrote:
It's a dubious interpretation of this sentence:

"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101) and/or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

Im not sure the writers meant it to be interpreted that way because otherwise all psykers in the book have 7-9 powers. However, it does seem to be able to be interpreted as such.

I really don't get how people are reading into this... the wording seems clear to me: 3 powers (chosen from) Discipline of Change, Dark Hereticus, and/or Discipline of Tzeentch. How people are getting that to mean "Up to 3 of each" makes me want to facepalm. I don't know if I should weep for humanity that people are actually trying to argue this bullgak. STOP READING INTO THINGS holy fething gak.

He knows 3 (4 with his warlord trait)
''and / or'' means he can mix from the three disciples or just take 4 spells from one lore.

He lost his invul reroll but got an psychic test reroll 1 aura which is nice.
Slight increase in points is also ok because the codex is much better than the index and you get a lot more spells.
There is still the problem loosing him turn 1 if you go second.
The changeling can make him a bit more durable though.

Saying he knows more than 3 (4 with his trait) is just gleefully and purposefully misreading the rule by ignoring the "or" in and/or and then giggling all the way to town.

Why did you post this both here and in YMDC?

As we told you in YMDC, it's 4 total, not 10.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Why did you post this both here and in YMDC?

As we told you in YMDC, it's 4 total, not 10.

I thought my original post in proposed rules, was deleted as i can no longer view it. So i made another. Assumed i'd posted it in the wrong place!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But yes, thanks for the replies, ill go by what youve said

Wayniac wrote:
I really don't get how people are reading into this... the wording seems clear to me: 3 powers (chosen from) Discipline of Change, Dark Hereticus, and/or Discipline of Tzeentch. How people are getting that to mean "Up to 3 of each" makes me want to facepalm. I don't know if I should weep for humanity that people are actually trying to argue this bullgak. STOP READING INTO THINGS holy fething gak.

This is dakka. You may as well ask for the world.

 Sim-Life wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
I really don't get how people are reading into this... the wording seems clear to me: 3 powers (chosen from) Discipline of Change, Dark Hereticus, and/or Discipline of Tzeentch. How people are getting that to mean "Up to 3 of each" makes me want to facepalm. I don't know if I should weep for humanity that people are actually trying to argue this bullgak. STOP READING INTO THINGS holy fething gak.

This is dakka. You may as well ask for the world.

Hey i came here to ask others opinions, i take no issue with the people using capital letter to emphasise they are shouting at me lol

As a logical expression “and/or” is logically equivalent to “inclusive or”. It isn't the best way of expressing inclusive or however as it can be read in ambiguous ways.

Inclusive Or (you select 3 total powers selection from 3 psychic disciplines)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101), or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

The clearer way to write this rule would be something like
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three combinations of psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101), or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

Exclusive Or (you select 3 powers from 1 psychic discipline)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from either the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101) or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

And (you select 9 psychic powers, 3 from each psychic discipline)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101) and Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

Except that you missed the fact he can take 2 powers from 1 discipline and 1 from another and 0 from the third. That is why it is and/or to demonstrate a choice of options from amongst the 3 disciplines.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Except that you missed the fact he can take 2 powers from 1 discipline and 1 from another and 0 from the third. That is why it is and/or to demonstrate a choice of options from amongst the 3 disciplines.

That is would still fall under “inclusive or”. As selecting 3 from 1 choice, 2 from 1 choice and 1 from a different choice, or 1 from each choice, is still “inclusive or”.

For a simpler example here is a 3 input “inclusive or” truth table.



By denoting the 3 psychic disciplines as:
A = “Discipline of Change”
B = “Dark Hereticus”
C = “Discipline of Tzeentch”

Where each discipline is a set of the elements N1, N2, .., N6.

Which can be expressed as a superset S = {A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6}.

This would be an 18-input truth table with a limit of 3 “true”. Which I don’t want to generate because it will be ugly.

How I would have written this rule is by stating “combinations” of psychic spells. As you are choosing 3 psychic powers from 18 choices. Which gives 816 possible psychic power combinations. Assuming all psychic spells are unique.

It isn’t an “exclusive or” because the sentences don’t denote exclusivity in the statement prefixing with “either”.

ntin wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Except that you missed the fact he can take 2 powers from 1 discipline and 1 from another and 0 from the third. That is why it is and/or to demonstrate a choice of options from amongst the 3 disciplines.

That is would still fall under “inclusive or”. As selecting 3 from 1 choice, 2 from 1 choice and 1 from a different choice, or 1 from each choice, is still “inclusive or”.

For a simpler example here is a 3 input “inclusive or” truth table.



By denoting the 3 psychic disciplines as:
A = “Discipline of Change”
B = “Dark Hereticus”
C = “Discipline of Tzeentch”

Where each discipline is a set of the elements N1, N2, .., N6.

Which can be expressed as a superset S = {A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6}.

This would be an 18-input truth table with a limit of 3 “true”. Which I don’t want to generate because it will be ugly.

How I would have written this rule is by stating “combinations” of psychic spells. As you are choosing 3 psychic powers from 18 choices. Which gives 816 possible psychic power combinations. Assuming all psychic spells are unique.

It isn’t an “exclusive or” because the sentences don’t denote exclusivity in the statement prefixing with “either”.

Thanks for unequivocally putting this thread to rest!!!

ntin wrote:
As a logical expression “and/or” is logically equivalent to “inclusive or”. It isn't the best way of expressing inclusive or however as it can be read in ambiguous ways.

Inclusive Or (you select 3 total powers selection from 3 psychic disciplines)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101), or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

The clearer way to write this rule would be something like
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three combinations of psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101), or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

Exclusive Or (you select 3 powers from 1 psychic discipline)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from either the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101) or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

And (you select 9 psychic powers, 3 from each psychic discipline)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101) and Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

If we're discussing grammar, the use of "either" is incorrect here; "either" is used when choosing between two options. "...three psychic powers from any one of ..." would work. Your last option isn't clear either; "three psychic powers from each of the ..."

Magnus knows at most 5 powers 3 on his own 1 for warlord and then smite..you have to be 100% slowed to think he has more than that

Five powers is really good too.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

ntin wrote:
As a logical expression “and/or” is logically equivalent to “inclusive or”. It isn't the best way of expressing inclusive or however as it can be read in ambiguous ways.

Inclusive Or (you select 3 total powers selection from 3 psychic disciplines)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101), or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

The clearer way to write this rule would be something like
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three combinations of psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101), or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

Exclusive Or (you select 3 powers from 1 psychic discipline)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from either the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101) or Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

And (you select 9 psychic powers, 3 from each psychic discipline)
"He knows the Smite psychic power and three psychic powers from the Discipline of Change (pg 100), Dark Hereticus discipline (pg 101) and Discipline of Tzeentch (pg 101)"

If we're discussing grammar, the use of "either" is incorrect here; "either" is used when choosing between two options. "...three psychic powers from any one of ..." would work. Your last option isn't clear either; "three psychic powers from each of the ..."

Fair points. I have seen "either" being used to denote exclusivity in a series of "or" statements but reading more on the usage that is more informal.