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.

Then the effect is, "you have +1 strength until end of the assault phase".

5, as you have +1 strength, unless there is a statement that those two statements are cumulative.

You're still not allowing the second one to resolve. If you were, you'd be applying the +1 STR as it requires.

I am applying the effect "All models in the unit have +1 strength until end of the assault phase". The effect doing anything according to what you just said does not have anything to do with the resolution. the effect is apparently separate from the power.

Yes. But the effect has been applied to the unit twice. You're only applying it once.

I am applying both ettects, both effects stat that the unit has something. It has it after the first effect and the second effect doesn't say "add +1 strength", it says it has +1 strength.

 jegsar wrote:
I am applying both ettects, both effects stat that the unit has something. It has it after the first effect and the second effect doesn't say "add +1 strength", it says it has +1 strength.

What you are missing is that 4+1+1 =6

I am saying that it only adds one. No where does it say that additions of strength are cumulative when added from the same psychic power. It states it has +1 strength until end of the assult phase. Then it states it again that it has +1 strength again until end of the assault phase, it already has that. If it said, all models in the unit have an additional +1 strength then i would agree. Different being is you take everywhere that states stuff stacks as a reminder, I take it is adding a cumulative effect to these type of statements.

 jegsar wrote:
I am saying that it only adds one. No where does it say that additions of strength are cumulative when added from the same psychic power. It states it has +1 strength until end of the assult phase. Then it states it again that it has +1 strength again until end of the assault phase, it already has that. If it said, all models in the unit have an additional +1 strength then i would agree. Different being is you take everywhere that states stuff stacks as a reminder, I take it is adding a cumulative effect to these type of statements.

Page 2 proves your statement incorrect.

"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." P. 2

Note it says Additions. +1 and +1 are additions.

"combination of rules..." it's the same rule, from the same power... Thank you for finding the sentience I was looking for this entire time.

It has a combination of rules - the same rule twice is still "rules"

I cast. I AM strength 5, because I have added 1 strength
I cast. I AM strength 6, because I have added 1 strength

Your unsupported and entirely ruleless contention is that you do not add this +1S after the first casting.

English IS hard, apparently, as you are claiming the word "unmodified" or "1 or more castings of...." is present, when it isnt.

You have no argument. Every single argument has been debunked, and we are back on you claiming, with no backing whatsoever, that maths doesnt work how it actually works.

You have $500 in your bank account.

Assuming anything either man A or man B says must be true and if not true instantly becomes true...

Man A walks up to you, "You have plus 50 dollars in your bank account this month" 1 minutes passes
Man B walks up to you, "You have plus 50 dollars in your bank account this month"

How much money is in your bank account? (I was even able to use the word plus in the sentience and it still doesn't work out with you adding them together.

Second scenario,
man A, "$50 have just been added to your bank account and
will be removed at the end of the month." 1 minute passes
man B, "$50 have just been added to your bank account and will be removed at the end of the month."
This would add them together.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And no, rules would be multiple rules, this is 1 rule applied twice, It's still 1 rule.

You move through dangerous terrain with a bike, and a activated dimensional key is within 12 inches, how many checks do you make for 1 bike? 1, 2, or 3?

One, because you're explicitly told to only ever take one per turn.

And if it didn't state that? Also it's not 1 per turn but thats beside the point.

1 rule, is 1 rule, no matter how many times applied unless stated otherwise.

So your contention is that, despite the power saying otherwise, you dont actually resolve the power before moving on?

You are stating that, when a model has HH cast on it, it is NOT S5 at that point?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So your contention is that, despite the power saying otherwise, you dont actually resolve the power before moving on?

You are stating that, when a model has HH cast on it, it is NOT S5 at that point?

When you check the strength of the models in the unit, with no other mods and base strength 4, it will be said to be strength 5.

The resolution of the power is placing the rule "all models in the unit (including independent characters) have + 1 Strength until the end of the Assault phase." on the unit, it doesn't change the strength of a unit but places an effect on the unit.

So you are saying you delay the aplication of the +1S until you check it for some reason?

Please find a rule stating this, because the actual rule states otherwise (there is no time given, so it applies the +1S immediately you resolve the power)

I am not saying you delay or don't delay anything. I am saying that it is constantly being recalculated, where are you getting this delay from?

When HH is resolved the rule (aka effect) gets applied.
As far as figuring out it's strength, you must look at each rule applied to it whenever you check it's strength, or whenever you apply a new rule you must check it, either way you look at it, it's the same.

Becuase if you apply it immediately, you go from S4 to S5. You are not at S4+1, you ARE S5

You then cast it again. You are told the unit is now Strength +1. What is the units CURRENT strength?

5

So the unit MUST go to S6.

If you disagree please provide a rule saying the unit is not actually S5 when the secodn casting is resolved.

alright.
I have a power fist. This makes me S8... then HH is cast upon me... what S am i?

A powerfist does not make you strength 8, it makes you strike at 2xuser

Hammerhand Makes you S+1, and comes before modifiers, so you are (S+1)*2

Try again, answer why you are not resolving the +1S before casting the second one.

Alright, Iron arm with the roll of a 1, instead of HH. Same scenario.

Assuming you start at STR 4, you're STR 5 now.

Nos was talking about something with timing and S5 vs S4+1 and about delaying the strength bonus.
You need to read from where you left off, to follow.
My last point is still that "you have +1 strength." stated twice is not the same as saying you have +2 strength as it is only 1 rule causing this benefit.

 jegsar wrote:
Nos was talking about something with timing and S5 vs S4+1 and about delaying the strength bonus.
You need to read from where you left off, to follow.
My last point is still that "you have +1 strength." stated twice is not the same as saying you have +2 strength as it is only 1 rule causing this benefit.

I followed. I answered your question.
And again, you're incorrect. There's 2 rules stating that - you keep ignoring that the second power resolved.

The answer to the question is 9 as it's the same senario as the powerfist but it is applied after the power first and therefor is not 5 but 4, "the model has +1 strength until the start of the players next movement phase" X2 from striking with the power first. however it's applied 4*2+1 and remembers the rules and how they effect it. Not 4+1=5... later x2 when striking.

I said previously to which you didn't respond
I am applying both effects, both effects state that the unit has something. It has it after the first effect and the second effect doesn't say "add +1 strength", it says it has +1 strength.

Then Reaper brought up

"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." P. 2

to which i responded with the fact that it is the same rule and not 2 rules, when you apply HH twice. As the same rule applied twice is still the 1 rule just stated twice.

It is a combination of rules - the same rule

{A,A} is still a combination. Your assertion is wrong, meaning your conclusion is wrong.

YOu are S(4+1)+1 = 6. Literally no other way to explain how fundamentally wrong you are

 jegsar wrote:
The answer to the question is 9

No. Absolutely wrong. Even wearing a power fist a space marine is never STR 9. He'd be STR 5 and strike at STR 9.
That may be what you meant to ask, but you didn't ask that question.

as it's the same senario as the powerfist but it is applied after the power first and therefor is not 5 but 4, "the model has +1 strength until the start of the players next movement phase" X2 from striking with the power first. however it's applied 4*2+1 and remembers the rules and how they effect it. Not 4+1=5... later x2 when striking

Objection, relevancy.

I said previously to which you didn't respond
I am applying both effects, both effects state that the unit has something. It has it after the first effect and the second effect doesn't say "add +1 strength", it says it has +1 strength.

You've said it before. I answered then. DR answered well enough this time.

Then Reaper brought up

"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." P. 2

to which i responded with the fact that it is the same rule and not 2 rules, when you apply HH twice. As the same rule applied twice is still the 1 rule just stated twice.

Except you're not applying the additional one.
Base 4.
Unit has +1. What is the units STR?
Unit has +1. What is the units STR?

If you say 5 you continue to not apply the second rule.

rigeld2 wrote:

 jegsar wrote:
The answer to the question is 9

No. Absolutely wrong. Even wearing a power fist a space marine is never STR 9. He'd be STR 5 and strike at STR 9.
That may be what you meant to ask, but you didn't ask that question.

you are correct, Apply the same questions to, "at the time of striking" as this is the only time i care about the Strength relevant to a powerfist anyway.
As you can see it isn't strength 5 but strength 4+effect(s)=value of strength.

as it's the same scenario as the powerfist but it is applied after the power first and therefor is not 5 but 4, "the model has +1 strength until the start of the players next movement phase" X2 from striking with the power first. however it's applied 4*2+1 and remembers the rules and how they effect it. Not 4+1=5... later x2 when striking

Objection, relevancy.

Strength is checked and recalculated from the start each time you need to know the strength, therefore when you add more strength it is not adding x2 to 5 it's breaking it back down to the original, 4+1 -> 4*2+1=9 instead of 5*2.

I said previously to which you didn't respond
I am applying both effects, both effects state that the unit has something. It has it after the first effect and the second effect doesn't say "add +1 strength", it says it has +1 strength.

You've said it before. I answered then. DR answered well enough this time.

Then Reaper brought up

"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." P. 2

to which i responded with the fact that it is the same rule and not 2 rules, when you apply HH twice. As the same rule applied twice is still the 1 rule just stated twice.

Except you're not applying the additional one.
Base 4.
Unit has +1. What is the units STR?
Unit has +1. What is the units STR?

If you say 5 you continue to not apply the second rule.

You have a bank account starting with $500 in it. Assuming whatever man A or man B say to be true and if not true it is made true. Man A, "You have Plus $50 in your bank account this month". 1 minute passes. Man B, you have plus $50 in your bank account this month". How much money is now in your bank account? $550.
That is argument 1.

Argument 2 is that P2 states a combination of rules... "The models in the unit have +1 strength until end of the assault phase." that is a rule. You give me that rule twice, it is still a single rule given twice, not a combination of two rules. To combine 2 objects you need to have 2 objects. Here you have 1 object that you are trying to combine with itself. If you disagree with this, find me another rule (outside of the psychic powers that we are arguing over) that stacks with itself and doesn't explicitly state that it stacks with itself.

Saves would stack with other saves if they weren't explicitly prohibited from doing so, the same way that HH stacks because you aren't prohibited from resolving it twice or more. The effect of Hammerhand isn't a Special Rule (see earlier in the thread for silly stuff that would happen if it were) and is as such not prohibited from stacking with itself, ergo multiple instances of Hammerhand stacks.

As for the bank account argument, +50$ this month compared to what?

Saves would not stack. No where do you get +1 to your save (outside of special rules which clearly do not stack with themselves), it says you get a 3+ save and a 4+ save etc... very different. Also this is not a rule stacking with itself. Notice how I say rule, not special rules. The multiple benefits from the psyker special rule is another argument but these 2 are less confusing and still hold true.

Find any rule that stacks with itself, that doesn't state that is has permission to stack with itself.

The same thing that +1 strength is being compared to. It's written in an identical way. The first time you add it, the second time you already have an additional $50 in your bank account so you don't need to change the amount of money in the bank account to make the statement true.