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.

I would call it a "Don't do that" bug.

"We told you guy to stop hitting reality with that thing how many times?"

I agree that Hammerhand should not work twice. It seems that the only way to apply one Hamerhand as a modifier before another would be to count "other modifiers" as other non-Hammerhand modifiers; this is closest to a RAI style of interpretation rather than a RAW style of interpretation.

Bear in mind though, that if Hammerhand is not counted as a modifier as DevianID suggested with reference to the Space Wolves FAQ (which I am not familiar with so I cannot be an accurate judge of its application to this issue) then it should work; but the use of the words "other modifiers" really seems to imply that Hammerhand is itself a modifier. "Other" references things in relation to annother thing, unlike words like "that" which can be used without allusion to anything else. For the Hammerhand rule to use the word "other" in relation to modifiers, it needs to be referencing something that is already a modifier; there is nothing else in the rule that I am aware of to fulfill this requirement, so it has to be referencing Hammerhand itself as a modifier --thus excluding it from the immunity that it could have garnered from a non-modifier status.

This is the best RAW reading I can make at this time.