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.

L0rdF1end wrote:In all fairness and thinking about it more I would imagine it would be FAQ'd to the following.

Smash attacks is base characteristic devided by 2 = 2
Any additional attacks such as Crushing Claws and Warp Speed would need to be normal attacks.

So in affect the tervigon would get:

1 Hammer of Wraith
2 Smash Attacks
D3+D3 normal attacks

If this came up in a game. I would go with this decision. Because I like it the most and doesn't outbalance the model too badly.

I found something interesting that gives credence to what Lord Yayula is saying.


Pg 24. Rolling To Hit
If you take a look at the Rolling to Hit section, if you look just before it we are told how to determine the number of attacks we are allowed. Thus you determine your max number of attacks BEFORE you roll to hit, right after making any pile in moves at the start of your initiative step.

Thus SMASH is applied AFTER the attack characteristic is modified.

Because Smash rule states you halve your attacks during the ROLL TO HIT simultaneously halving the attack just before doing so.

Douglaspocock wrote:

L0rdF1end wrote:In all fairness and thinking about it more I would imagine it would be FAQ'd to the following.

Smash attacks is base characteristic devided by 2 = 2
Any additional attacks such as Crushing Claws and Warp Speed would need to be normal attacks.

So in affect the tervigon would get:

1 Hammer of Wraith
2 Smash Attacks
D3+D3 normal attacks

If this came up in a game. I would go with this decision. Because I like it the most and doesn't outbalance the model too badly.

I also believe that this is how it should be played. But there's decent arguments for both other cases aswell.

Douglaspocock wrote:
If this came up in a game. I would go with this decision. Because I like it the most and doesn't outbalance the model too badly.

How does doing it right unbalance the model? A Tervigon with 3 powers (to have a decent chance of getting the Warpspeed power) and Crushing Claws clocks in at @225pts (depending on if they have TS or not). You have to give up Catalyst (with the new improved FNP and the fact only Runic Weapons and RoW can stop).

With the huge nerf they just got to brood progenitor I think they are priced about right.

It should simply state unmodified to make things clear. It is not clear and that is the problem.

Until it is FAQ'd to say unmodified then the attacks are halfed based on the amount of attacks at the time.

So modifiers are counted and then the attacks are halfed.

Not half the attacks + modifiers.

This thread is ridiculous. People are arguing proven math against specific english definitions.

Also it is NEVER good to decide which way to play a rule based upon your view of balance. That is always going to be biased.

racta wrote:Also it is NEVER good to decide which way to play a rule based upon your view of balance. That is always going to be biased.

It is also NEVER good to assume peoples motives based on Bias.

DeathReaper wrote:Division is not mentioned as a Multiplier.

Division is a Divisor not a Multiplier.

The two can produce similar results, but they are not the same.

You are simply wrong. It is not opinion, it is a fact, please drop this portion of your argument for the love of God.

fleetofclaw wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Division is not mentioned as a Multiplier.

Division is a Divisor not a Multiplier.

The two can produce similar results, but they are not the same.

You are simply wrong. It is not opinion, it is a fact, please drop this portion of your argument for the love of God.

Please Learn the Definition of Multiplier and Divisor.

here check these if you want to know more:

http://bit.ly/ODeLDE

http://bit.ly/ODeQXN

I guess someone didn't pay attention in the math class. A multiplier is a divisor and a divisor is a multiplier.

From your link:
mul·ti·pli·er (mlt-plr)
n.
1. One that multiplies: This old house is a multiplier of expenses.
2. Mathematics The number by which another number is multiplied. In 8 × 32, the multiplier is 8.
3. Physics A device, such as a phototube, used to enhance or increase an effect.

Do you read any restriction on the multiplier being an integer? It's just a number. ANY NUMBER. 1/2 or 0.5 is the multiplier you need to half something.

It doesn't mention division in the "Modifiers" section, so we have two choices:

We can act like we took a math class in our lives and use multiplication by 1/2. This result fits with the rules, and therefor is simple to follow.

Or

We can determine that since division is not listed, it breaks the game when in conjunction with modifiers. We then have to pick our models up because we can't move any further with the combat resolution.

DeathReaper wrote:

fleetofclaw wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Division is not mentioned as a Multiplier.

Division is a Divisor not a Multiplier.

The two can produce similar results, but they are not the same.

You are simply wrong. It is not opinion, it is a fact, please drop this portion of your argument for the love of God.

Please Learn the Definition of Multiplier and Divisor.

here check these if you want to know more:

http://bit.ly/ODeLDE

http://bit.ly/ODeQXN

3 halved = 3 / 2 = 3 * 1/2 = 3 * 0.5 (which 0.5 itself is 1 * 1./2 or 1 * .5 which is....)

Have you ever solved a basic equations? What's the order of operations? You do multiplication and division at the same step because they are mathematically identical. Division is a word invented to help humans grasp multiplying something by less than a whole something, since we tend to analogize everything to help us grasp them.

Shall I go on?

racta wrote:It doesn't mention division in the "Modifiers" section, so we have two choices:

We can act like we took a math class in our lives and use multiplication by 1/2. This result fits with the rules, and therefor is simple to follow.

Or

We can determine that since division is not listed, it breaks the game when in conjunction with modifiers. We then have to pick our models up because we can't move any further with the combat resolution.

Why? When it's easier to make up our own rules, throw out all precedent, and apply 1/2 to the total AFTER additive modifiers, flying totally in the face of GW's direct adherence to the mathematical order of operations? This is the 41st millennium, logic is abhorred, and ignorance is embraced.

It is not about normal order of operations, as the book tells us how to apply multiple modifiers. We have to go by what he book says and not the normal order of operations, unless the order is undefined (Which it is not undefined, it is explicit on how multiple modifiers are applied).

I know that you CAN use Multipliers to get the same result as the Divisor, but the Rules (you know the things that tell us what we can do) do not mention how to Halve something, so we fall back on the normal English definition of such thing which is:

halve
Verb:
Divide into two parts of equal or roughly equal size:

Regardless of where you apply the multiplication and division, it doesnt change the outcome really. If you check pg 24. it states how you determine the number of attacks that a model can make.

In bold on pg 24, top left. "Each engaged model make a number of attacks based on its characteristic profile, plus the following bonus attacks." It then give examples of the bonuses, charge bonus, 2 weapon bonus, and "other bonuses" (from special rules and wargear)

Smash states to halve the attack characteristic. So following that procedure, the Tervigon has 3. It doesnt matter whether you divide it or multiply it, the result will come out as 1.5 which is rounded to 2, by rule. Then you add in the "bonus" attacks. Charge, Crushing claws, warp speed, etc etc.

2, +d3, +d3, +1 for the Tervigon.

IF Smash stated to halve the number of attacks, total attacks, etc.. It would definitely apply differently. But as it stands (until a FAQ) it modifies the Attack Characteristic, which is completely different from the "Bonus Attacks"

The bonus attacks add to the Attacks Characteristic.

Check out P.2 "Attacks and Wounds are the only characteristics that can be raised above 10"

Bonus Attacks add to the Characteristic.

DeathReaper wrote:It is not about normal order of operations, as the book tells us how to apply multiple modifiers. We have to go by what he book says and not the normal order of operations, unless the order is undefined (Which it is not undefined, it is explicit on how multiple modifiers are applied).

I know that you CAN use Multipliers to get the same result as the Divisor, but the Rules (you know the things that tell us what we can do) do not mention how to Halve something, so we fall back on the normal English definition of such thing which is:

halve
Verb:
Divide into two parts of equal or roughly equal size:

Sure, but when we find out that division is not listed amongst multiple modifiers, why can't we use the basic order of operations to figure out that multiplication and division happen at the same time, both before addition/subtraction?

What are you using as a reference to ignore the basic rules of mathematics, since even the modifiers section doesn't go against basic math, I see no precedent.

DeathReaper wrote:It is not about normal order of operations, as the book tells us how to apply multiple modifiers. We have to go by what he book says and not the normal order of operations, unless the order is undefined (Which it is not undefined, it is explicit on how multiple modifiers are applied).

I know that you CAN use Multipliers to get the same result as the Divisor, but the Rules (you know the things that tell us what we can do) do not mention how to Halve something, so we fall back on the normal English definition of such thing which is:

halve
Verb:
Divide into two parts of equal or roughly equal size:

Oh. My. God. GW directly follows mathematical order of operations. It's not me applying it, it was GW.

It's not about doing two different things to get the same result. It IS the same thing. You *think* it's different, you *think* some different rules of math are being applied, but they're not.

Two parts of roughly equal size... lol we're not cutting a cake, these are numbers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:Bonus Attacks add to the Characteristic.

Just like any other stat modifier in the game. What's your point? Remember all the old Initiative modifier debates? The point of GW's modifier ruling was to make this simple. Which trust me, they did.

You guys should read the following CAREFULLY

Highlights.

Pg 2. MODIFIERS
We are told how to apply modifiers, MULTIPLIERS, ADDITIONS & SUBSTRACTIONS. But division is not included in this.

- Side A argues that multiplying IS division. Thus a multiplyer for halving would be 0.5 so as to properly follow the rules of the game
- Side B argues that divison is division. Otherwise you could make the same argument for addition being substraction/multiplication/division and still be correct. So the fact that it was excluded can change things.

Pg 5. DIVIDE TO CONQUER
Apparently everyone missed this bit, the rulebook does in fact cover division specifically. And it also directly uses HALVING as an example of division and how it is to be applied. Further supporting argument B

Pg 7. BASIC VERSUS ADVANCED
Here we see that Smash is an advanced rule which we are told take precedence over basic rules normally followed as per the example shown. So we are supposed to ignore the standard way of doing things in favor of whatever the advanced rule asks us to do.

UNMODIFIED CHARACTERISTICS
- Also being brought up as a point that many rules affecting characteristics clearly state that they work against the unmodified characteristic. Where this key word is lacking in the smash rule so that it can be very possible that are you in fact required to halve ALL your attacks as they should already be 'in play' upon entering combat before deciding to use the Smash rule.

Pg 24. Rolling To Hit
If you take a look at the Rolling to Hit section, if you look just before it we are told how to determine the number of attacks we are allowed. Thus you determine your max number of attacks BEFORE you roll to hit, right after making any pile in moves at the start of your initiative step.

Thus SMASH is applied AFTER the attack characteristic is modified.
Because Smash rule states you halve your attacks during the ROLL TO HIT simultaneously halving the attack just before doing so.

-UPDATE-
Apparently someone did infact misquote page 24 as i just had another look. Charge/CC/Warp Speed are categorized as 'bonus' attacks not a + to attack characteristic as someone else had misquoted in the thread.

Which if we follow things in order keeping in mind that we are NOT using a multiplier here, this is divison as per the Smash rule and the rule on pg5 this would work out as follows:

1. Declare you are using smash rule

2. Count up your attacks as normal.

3. Halve the attacks on your profile just before rolling to hit.

4. Add S10 to all attacks.

5. Profit

So in the end you get the same result a Tervigon with 2 attacks from it's profile and his bonus attacks all S10.

Had the bonus attacks been categorized as a + to attack characteristics then things would've ended up quite differently as Smash does not state to only use the unmodified characteristic and furthermore it is halved during the roll to hit portion after attacks have already been added in.

SCvodimier wrote:Sure, but when we find out that division is not listed amongst multiple modifiers, why can't we use the basic order of operations to figure out that multiplication and division happen at the same time, both before addition/subtraction?

What are you using as a reference to ignore the basic rules of mathematics, since even the modifiers section doesn't go against basic math, I see no precedent.

The Permissive ruleset tells us what we can do. we can not just invent a place to Halve the statstic because the rules give no allowance for us to do so.

DeathReaper wrote:

SCvodimier wrote:Sure, but when we find out that division is not listed amongst multiple modifiers, why can't we use the basic order of operations to figure out that multiplication and division happen at the same time, both before addition/subtraction?

What are you using as a reference to ignore the basic rules of mathematics, since even the modifiers section doesn't go against basic math, I see no precedent.

The Permissive ruleset tells us what we can do. we can not just invent a place to Halve the statstic because the rules give no allowance for us to do so.

So any time we see division, the game breaks because by a permissive rules set, we are not allowed to include division since the game didn't allow us to?

Nothing against you, but do you know how stupid that sounds?

DeathReaper wrote:The bonus attacks add to the Attacks Characteristic.

Check out P.2 "Attacks and Wounds are the only characteristics that can be raised above 10"

Bonus Attacks add to the Characteristic.

Edited for a FAQ, but also wasn't trying to sound rude, just saying it seems like you're personally trying to bring down the Tyranid armies on your own I don't really care, but you've made a thread recently that was obviously related to the bone sword thread.

Personally I'm with the 50% or so that will be adding it on after Smash, but a FAQ will hopefully clear it up!


Thanks
Dan

Stormbreed wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:The bonus attacks add to the Attacks Characteristic.

Check out P.2 "Attacks and Wounds are the only characteristics that can be raised above 10"

Bonus Attacks add to the Characteristic.

You're obv very good at knowing rules and bending them to be what you want them to be. I think as I did in your other 2 threads where you have a hard on for HATING on Nids, that it is Codex over rules.

Sound weird I know, but stay with me, Crushing Claws says at the beginning of each round of combat.

So if you agree, or more so prove your point by saying "Beginning" in this case means "Before" Smash, you must also concede that the "Immediately" on the very same page means just that "Immediately".

While in a way this is a Hi-Jack for this thread, I just notice you personally fighting a lot of battle (even faking some to prove your point) against Nid armies. Not sure why, but it is what it is.

Thanks
Dan

Hate to burst your bubble, but crushing claws were rewritten to say at the start of the fight sub-phase.

DR - just stop. Halving something IS multiplying by 0.5. It is identical.

You guys should read the following CAREFULLY

Highlights.

Pg 2. MODIFIERS
We are told how to apply modifiers, MULTIPLIERS, ADDITIONS & SUBSTRACTIONS. But division is not included in this.

- Side A argues that multiplying IS division. Thus a multiplyer for halving would be 0.5 so as to properly follow the rules of the game
- Side B argues that divison is division. Otherwise you could make the same argument for addition being substraction/multiplication/division and still be correct. So the fact that it was excluded can change things.

Pg 5. DIVIDE TO CONQUER
Apparently everyone missed this bit, the rulebook does in fact cover division specifically. And it also directly uses HALVING as an example of division and how it is to be applied. Further supporting argument B

Pg 7. BASIC VERSUS ADVANCED
Here we see that Smash is an advanced rule which we are told take precedence over basic rules normally followed as per the example shown. So we are supposed to ignore the standard way of doing things in favor of whatever the advanced rule asks us to do.

UNMODIFIED CHARACTERISTICS
- Also being brought up as a point that many rules affecting characteristics clearly state that they work against the unmodified characteristic. Where this key word is lacking in the smash rule so that it can be very possible that are you in fact required to halve ALL your attacks as they should already be 'in play' upon entering combat before deciding to use the Smash rule.

Pg 24. Rolling To Hit
If you take a look at the Rolling to Hit section, if you look just before it we are told how to determine the number of attacks we are allowed. Thus you determine your max number of attacks BEFORE you roll to hit, right after making any pile in moves at the start of your initiative step.

Thus SMASH is applied AFTER the attack characteristic is modified.
Because Smash rule states you halve your attacks during the ROLL TO HIT simultaneously halving the attack just before doing so.

-UPDATE-
Apparently someone did infact misquote page 24 as i just had another look. Charge/CC/Warp Speed are categorized as 'bonus' attacks not a + to attack characteristic as someone else had misquoted in the thread.

Which if we follow things in order keeping in mind that we are NOT using a multiplier here, this is divison as per the Smash rule and the rule on pg5 this would work out as follows:

1. Declare you are using smash rule

2. Count up your attacks as normal.

3. Halve the attacks on your profile just before rolling to hit.

4. Add S10 to all attacks.

5. Profit

So in the end you get the same result a Tervigon with 2 attacks from it's profile and his bonus attacks all S10.

Had the bonus attacks been categorized as a + to attack characteristics then things would've ended up quite differently as Smash does not state to only use the unmodified characteristic and furthermore it is halved during the roll to hit portion after attacks have already been added in.

SCvodimier wrote:So any time we see division, the game breaks because by a permissive rules set, we are not allowed to include division since the game didn't allow us to?

Nothing against you, but do you know how stupid that sounds?

No, Read P.5 where it talks about dividing (Halving) stats

They specifically mention Division, there so you are allowed to Divide.

Why they did not include it in the Multiple modifiers rule?

1) I do not "bending them to be what you want them to be. I think as I did in your other 2 threads where you have a hard on for HATING on Nids... " Please stop insinuating this, it is just not true.

2) "(even faking some to prove your point)" Please retract this, I fake nothing. it is kind of insulting.

3) Smash is applied after the attack characteristic is modified, as you apply smash "when it makes its close combat attacks" P.42

Even if you Multiply by .5 (And I am not saying this is correct via RAW) you still get the same result as Smash (Advanced) overrides basic order of operations.

The bonus attacks add to the Attacks Characteristic.

P.2 "Attacks and Wounds are the only characteristics that can be raised above 10"

Q: How do you raise a characteristic?
A: add bonuses.

Akaiyou,

Am I allowed to apply any other CC bonuses and rules to my Smash attacks? Ie rerolls from scything talons or preferred enemy? ID from boneswords?

DeathReaper wrote:The bonus attacks add to the Attacks Characteristic.

Check out P.2 "Attacks and Wounds are the only characteristics that can be raised above 10"

Bonus Attacks add to the Characteristic.

And you will still come out with the same result. Either way you read it, the multiplier / addition effects will come up with the same number.

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/half

Macmillan defines half as 1/2 or 50% of something. If you want to determine the half value for a number, for instance 3, you simply take that number and multiply it by 1/2 or by 50% and you get the half value of 1.5. This is mathematically correct and irrefutable. That being said, in the absence of any rules that change the normal order, we perform multiplications first, add/subtract second and set value modifiers third. Nothing in the Smash rule changes these rules, so they are still in effect when it is used. Therefore, by RAW, you must take the Attack characteristic of 3, multiply it by 50% (0.50) or multiply by 1/2 (also 0.50) and then apply any additions or subtractions. There is no other way to calculate this.

Agreed with Wolvesoffenris.
And you can see that we can use different definitions of "halve" depending on which dictionary you go to, so instead of going by the word's definition, we can go by the mathematical definition that is always the same in EVERY language.

What do you do to halve attacks? x = attack characteristic, y = smash attacks. (x/2)=y. Which can be called division, so we will put a mathematical equivalent instead, (1/2)*x=y. Still true, and it is now a multiplier so the rules tell us when to add other modifiers to it.

If you want to get super fancy, you can also replace it with x-(x/2)=y. Then we just made it into subtraction, and then other modifiers can be added with the same results.

racta wrote:Agreed with Wolvesoffenris.
And you can see that we can use different definitions of "halve" depending on which dictionary you go to, so instead of going by the word's definition, we can go by the mathematical definition that is always the same in EVERY language.

What do you do to halve attacks? x = attack characteristic, y = smash attacks. (x/2)=y. Which can be called division, so we will put a mathematical equivalent instead, (1/2)*x=y. Still true, and it is now a multiplier so the rules tell us when to add other modifiers to it.

If you want to get super fancy, you can also replace it with x-(x/2)=y. Then we just made it into subtraction, and then other modifiers can be added with the same results.

-(x/2)+x=y Now it is addition.

Well this is one of the most absurd things I've ever seen be argued, here in YMDC or anywhere else for that matter. This isn't even Rules Lawyering, this just a flat out wrong argument. This is worse than arguing grammar, considering mathematics is immutable.

This is, literally, not even Mathematics 101. This is baser than that. To argue that Division isn't discussed in the rules so isn't allowed (and thus breaking the rules) is disingenuous at best.

To be frank, this makes me wonder about other arguments made by Death Reaper since this one is so close to trolling as to be almost indistinguishable. That's just how wrong this argument is!

Please, for your own sake Death Reaper, review the order of operations in mathematics. You'll even find the rules for applying modifiers in W40K obeys it, rules as written. Its as true as the sky being blue or you needing oxygen to live. There isn't any real way to even rebut your argument other than to dismiss it for being wrong on such a basic level.