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.

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

Does that include rules that do not state they stack with itself, but were asked about (so are an FAQ but not an errata/amendment)?

That is a good question, what is a rule...
I would say everything that states anything about the game, that is not fluff is a rule. Though we have moved on from that a while ago. I think we can agree that HH is a rule. If it's not a rule, or wargear it doesn't have permission to modify a characteristic and since it isn't wargear it must be a rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Happy FAQs are rules yes. If the FAQ can stack with itself without explicit permission I would accept that but I thought you wanted to concentrate on 1 thing at a time.

Right now we are talking about

 jegsar wrote:
No i am implying that HH is a single rule, it states a combination of rules on page 2. multiple modifiers

If a model has a combinations of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any... then apply any additions...

Does it have a combination of rules applying or 1 rule that is trying to be applied twice? (You answered this above, it's 1 rule)
And yes i am implying that a rule is an entire rule and not just +1 strength. Further I will imply that you need to look at what is affecting a characteristic again when you go to modify it again. Point being when you go to modify a model with a power first and the strength bonus to striking, after iron arm has been cast on it. It re does the calculation completely, putting in the power fist first then the iron arm.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So it is not set and forget, we have to keep in mind what rules are affecting the model and how they interact. HH for example would go before the power first but you would still need to check that by reading HH.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
So lets figure this out before we move on to another topic. Unless you think HH is not a rule but something else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Btw with the quote i am stating that since it is talking about multiple rules, and this is a single rule, then it does not stack.

So what if you have a Power Axe and Furious Charge? Those both give +1S after all.

And you still haven't answered the Armour Save example. I'll run it again a bit more thoroughly:

Let's assume you have 2 armour saves, a 4+ (from 'Eavy Armour) and a 4+ (from the Ork Bike you're driving). Let's also assume that the blanket prohibition of taking more than one save existed. You get hit by an S4 AP5 attack. What would prevent you from taking both the saves, i.e. stacking them? You'd have permission to use both the saves and you'd have no rule explicitly forbidding it. In short, we'd have a situation that mimics that of Hammerhand. Back to reality, why does it explicitly say that it's forbidden to take two saves if that doesn't matter? If it's just a reminder, I refer to earlier in the thread where we pointed out that the "different powers" part is effectively a reminder. If it's because you'd otherwise be allowed to stack saves then the Hammerhand situation is identical minus the blanket prohibition, ergo you're allowed to stack Hammerhand.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
So what if you have a Power Axe and Furious Charge? Those both give +1S after all.

They are separate special rules that give +1str, hence why stacking


you cannot stack FC on FC

or power axe on power axe,

or any special rule on itself

special rules are on pretty much everything, weapons, wargear, abilites, pg 32 is very clear that whenever gear or abilities bend/break the normal rules, they are then special rules, and dont stack with themselves

the rule on saves also explicitly states you only ever, EVER, get one, so your save argument is not the best analogy to make.

Why is +1S different from +1S?

Also, don't dodge the other question. I know what the rules say about saves, which is why I adresses that in the example.

+1str is not the special rule, it is the benifit of a special rule.


the rule is you cannot stack the benifit from the same special rule, not that different special rules cannot stack the same benifit

you are also given express permission to stack different USR's benifits

you are denied, explicitly, permision to stack identical USR's benifits


power axes have their own special rule, so does FC, hence stacking

Except Hammerhand is not a special rule.

It is a Psychic power.

Premise 1: The unit, with two castings of HH have two rules applied to it. (Do we agree?)

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

You Strike at Str 10 if you are base Str4 + Hammerhand and a Powerfist.

 jegsar wrote:
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.

This is not correct for Hammerhand. HH makes you strike at Str 10 with a powerfist.

 jegsar wrote:
I still stand by what i said about it not working regardless of it's specialty however if you want to see that HH must be special...

page 2, what we have been missing this entire time

Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model's characteristics....

meaning it must be wargear (i don't think so) or a special rule in order to modify a characteristic... I can't find anything else that allows me to modify the characteristics and since HH is not wargear... HH is a special rule.

False Dichotomy

It does not say that ONLY wargear or special rules can modify. Again, you are literally making up rules here, by inserting words that do not exist.

Dont.

You are also stating that "a combination of rules...." means "ONLY a combination of rules...."

Again, you are literally making up rules.

Dont.

Any more arguments we can easily refute?

This thread needs a lock down, bad. The side stating that HH does not stack with itself has patiently cited the rules supporting their position. The side stating that HH does stack with itself seem to be arguing individual words in the English language rather than their actual position. Case in point the post directly above mine.

SJ

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 jegsar wrote:
I am not claiming HH is a special rule, Just a rule. Now answer my question,
If i give a model stealth twice, is that a rule it benefits from twice or is that 2 rules?

Once we get past this I will get back to HH

Stealth is one Special Rule applied twice.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except Hammerhand is not a special rule.

It is a Psychic power.

Premise 1: The unit, with two castings of HH have two rules applied to it. (Do we agree?)

No I asked this question and AlmightyWalrus answered which i agree with, it is 1 rule is stated/applied twice.
I say it is a special rule, but that is irreverent to my argument as long as we agree the HH is a "rule". As long as we agree it is 1 rule then page 2 covers it under

"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

HH is only applied once since it is only 1 rule, not 2 even when it is cast twice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nos, you can only do what the book says you can do. that is the grounds on which a permissive rule set is made. It states a combination of rules can modify. No where does it state the same rule can modify twice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Show me a rule that does modify twice without explicit permission. Armor saves do not stack, show me something that does stack.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
This thread needs a lock down, bad. The side stating that HH does not stack with itself has patiently cited the rules supporting their position. The side stating that HH does stack with itself seem to be arguing individual words in the English language rather than their actual position. Case in point the post directly above mine.

SJ

Subjective.

Its easily shown that the anti-stacking side has fabricated rules without backing. Even to the point of manipulating rules as they appear in print.

Oh and death I am not just talking about HH, when I am talking about HH i state that i am. Covered on page 12, you always have to recheck what effects there are, it just happens that HH would be re applied first. Yes that is S10. Now replace that with Iron Arm and you see how reapplying changes the outcome when you strike.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
The side stating that HH does stack with itself seem to be arguing individual words in the English language

Welcome to YMDC. The nature of the forum (and of the rules discussed herein) pretty much requires discussion of words.

Sorry... getting annoyed at people interrupting and back quoting without answer the question presented to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 jegsar wrote:
I still stand by what i said about it not working regardless of it's specialty however if you want to see that HH must be special...

page 2, what we have been missing this entire time

Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model's characteristics....

meaning it must be wargear (i don't think so) or a special rule in order to modify a characteristic... I can't find anything else that allows me to modify the characteristics and since HH is not wargear... HH is a special rule.

False Dichotomy

It does not say that ONLY wargear or special rules can modify. Again, you are literally making up rules here, by inserting words that do not exist.

Dont.

You can ONLY do what the book says you can do, permissive ruleset. It also says anything that is outside of a normal rule which is obviously a rule that doesn't change any standard rules is a special rule. Either HH is a special rule because it does something not normally allowed by the paragraph about modifying characteristics or it's a special rule because it does modify characteristics (where the paragraph states special rules, or wargear...) , however my argument doesn't require it to be a special rule as long as we agree it is a single rule even if cast multiple times.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except Hammerhand is not a special rule.

It is a Psychic power.

Premise 1: The unit, with two castings of HH have two rules applied to it. (Do we agree?)

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

You Strike at Str 10 if you are base Str4 + Hammerhand and a Powerfist.

 jegsar wrote:
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.

This is not correct for Hammerhand. HH makes you strike at Str 10 with a powerfist.

what is a special rule
pg 32

in the USR section,
pg 32
"whenever a creature or weapon has an ability that breaks or bends one of the main game rules, it is represented by a special rule"
pg 66 *psykers*
*to use his abilities to full effect, a psyker must focus ..*

just because you seem to be in denial over psychic powers being abilities with special rules that bendébreak the main rules, while the BRB says it is.

also, pg 2 says *certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a characteristic's positively or negatively by adding to it(+1,+2, ect)*
so if psychic powers are not special rules, are you claiming them to be wargear?

denying something is a special rule
is to deny that an ability that breaks or bends one of the main game rules, making something stronger is actually specifically listed as one of the examples of what special rules do.

normal rule, your model is at Str=S
special rule makes it S+1

so if your rule is not special (psychic powers or weapons or race or terrain all grant special rules) then you cannot modify the main rule of the model being at Str S


are psychic powers rules or special rules?

what chapter are they in? psykers pg 66-69

where is the psykers rule located? pg 41 in the special rules section, saying it has it's own chapter on pg 66-69, because it is just that special.

are psychic powers abilities? yes, this is also said word for word in the BRB

do psychic powers modify the normal rules in BRB? you bet, you get to modify stats and do lots of other stuff you wouldnt normally be able to do.
all the above is 100% undeniable

yet you say powers are just boring old normal rules, that do not modify normal rules.

prove the power doesnt bend or break a normal rule, or its a special rule,



Pg 32 BRB
"what special rules do i have?"
**most special rules are given to a model by the relevant entry in its codex. That said, a models attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.

Similarly a model might get special rules as the result of psychic powers, scenario special rules or being hunkered down in a particular type of terrain.

where this is the case, the rule that governs the psychic power, scenario or type of terrain in question will make this abundantly clear.

most of the commonly used special rules in 40k are listed here, but this is by no means an exhaustive list. Many troops have their own unique abilities, which are laid out in their codex.**


i see pages of denial, and *oh but I can cast the power again from another unit*, according to the psykers special rule of course, which you can do with stealth too, cast it all you want, it wont stack with itself, even though its an additive multiplier.

and though 1+1=2 in real life, repeating over and over that 1+1=2 does not mean additive multipliers from special rules or wargear stack in 40k by default.

you have yet to provide any evidence allowing a non special rule to modify characteristics, let alone stack with itself

 jegsar wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except Hammerhand is not a special rule.

It is a Psychic power.

Premise 1: The unit, with two castings of HH have two rules applied to it. (Do we agree?)

No I asked this question and AlmightyWalrus answered which i agree with, it is 1 rule is stated/applied twice.
I say it is a special rule, but that is irreverent to my argument as long as we agree the HH is a "rule". As long as we agree it is 1 rule then page 2 covers it under

"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

HH is only applied once since it is only 1 rule, not 2 even when it is cast twice.

So 2 castings of HH are not two of the same rules in effect for the target unit?

Got any rules to back that up?

Why are you ignoring the second application of HH (Even if you say it has no effect, it was legally cast upon the unit).

You don't get to stack HH

yes, all powers stack.

 Aglobalthreat wrote:
You don't get to stack HH

We have shown permission to cast HH with two different psykers onto the same unit.

The other side has not shown any rules that restrict this permission.

2 different HH's are a "a combination of rules...that modify a characteristic" P. 2 (2 castings of HH is literally 2 of the same rule(AKA a combination of the two rules) that modify a characteristic).

Therefore they are both applied.

and as 4 +1 +1 = 6, the unit becomes Str 6.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Also, don't dodge the other question. I know what the rules say about saves, which is why I adresses that in the example.

Still waiting.

Two instances of the same rule is still two rules.

And you're being dishonest. You said yourself earlier in the thread that everything that isn't fluff is rules . "However, to use his abilities to the fullest, a Psyker must focus on a limited number of powers to hone and master." (pg. 66) is fluff, and yet you cite it as rules.

Additionally, the +1S is not a direct benefit of being a Psyker, casting a psychic power is. As you're only allowed to cast Hammerhand once per Psyker you still wouldn't be breaking any rules, unless you start counting indirect advantages, at which point the Psyker system and a substantial part of the rulebook collapses.

And, as nos said, omission does not prove exclusion. You're told that different powers stack, not that two instances of the same don't.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
This thread needs a lock down, bad. The side stating that HH does not stack with itself has patiently cited the rules supporting their position. The side stating that HH does stack with itself seem to be arguing individual words in the English language rather than their actual position. Case in point the post directly above mine.

SJ

Yes, dissecting how a rule is written usually means you need to look at the words used. It is bizarre for you to say otherwise

Oh, and to point out - your entire argument was based on one flaw: that you stated HH was a special rule, or gave a special rule. It isnt, and doesnt. Nothing you said therefore proves your side
The Stacking side has repeatedly shown rules, the anti-stack side have yet to show any actual rules

Jegsar - 2 of the same rule is a combination of rules. {A.A} is a combination that can be made out of the string (A,B,C). Your point is, yet again, refuted.

YOu are fabricating rules by adding words that are not there. Dont

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Also, don't dodge the other question. I know what the rules say about saves, which is why I adresses that in the example.

Still waiting.

Two instances of the same rule is still two rules.

And you're being dishonest. You said yourself earlier in the thread that everything that isn't fluff is rules . "However, to use his abilities to the fullest, a Psyker must focus on a limited number of powers to hone and master." (pg. 66) is fluff, and yet you cite it as rules.

Additionally, the +1S is not a direct benefit of being a Psyker, casting a psychic power is. As you're only allowed to cast Hammerhand once per Psyker you still wouldn't be breaking any rules, unless you start counting indirect advantages, at which point the Psyker system and a substantial part of the rulebook collapses.

And, as nos said, omission does not prove exclusion. You're told that different powers stack, not that two instances of the same don't.

Armor saves do not stack in the game, i asked for something that does. No need to dodge as it doesn't answer my question.

I will quote you here where you state, it is 1 rule being applied twice not two rules.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 jegsar wrote:
I am not claiming HH is a special rule, Just a rule. Now answer my question, If i give a model stealth twice, is that a rule it benefits from twice or is that 2 rules? Once we get past this I will get back to HH

Stealth is one Special Rule applied twice.

Back to page 2, 2 instances of A rule is still A rule and therefore singular. The multiple modifiers states a combination of rules.

One again if you do not have permission to do something, you cannot do it. I have permission to stack separate powers, you do not have permission to stack the same power. By not having permission you are not allowed to do it since you can only do what is stated. If something allows you to do it, then that is outside of the normal characteristics modifier rules on page 2 and therefore must be a special rule. If it's a special rule then it cannot stack with itself unless stated otherwise.

Though HH already does something outside of the normal rules by changing the order of multiple modifiers are applied so it is a special rule... Page 32, and page 2..,

Most of the more commonly used special rules in Warhammer 40,000 are listed here, but this is by no means an exhaustive list.

Not all special rules are stated in this section.

first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions,

This main game rule/normal rule is changed by HH

Whenever a creature or weapon has an ability that breaks or bends one of the main game rules, it is represented by a special rule.

HH therefore must be a special rule

Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule more than once.

HH is not cumulative.

How does "+!S" BREAK or BEND a game rule? Show the rule it breaks.

As has been repeatedly shown to you your premise is faulty; it asks for a combination of rules. 2 of the same rule IS a combination of rules

{A,A} is a valid combination, no matter how many times you pretend otherwise

I mean, the difference between s6 and s7 is really massive 99 times out of 100 versus t4, so let's make a 13 page thread why your already-powerful marines with beefed up assault cannons in infantry squads can get one more strength in CC, right?

HH cannot stack- it's like casting protection from evil twice in D&D. You can cover more area (models), but you won't give a cumulative benefit for each time you cast it on the same dude, at least not in 6th edition. I believe the rules quoted in this thread, and GW's clear intentions in making sure nothing stacks, proves this point.

uberjoras wrote:
I mean, the difference between s6 and s7 is really massive 99 times out of 100 versus t4, so let's make a 13 page thread why your already-powerful marines with beefed up assault cannons in infantry squads can get one more strength in CC, right?

HH cannot stack- it's like casting protection from evil twice in D&D. You can cover more area (models), but you won't give a cumulative benefit for each time you cast it on the same dude, at least not in 6th edition. I believe the rules quoted in this thread, and GW's clear intentions in making sure nothing stacks, proves this point.

Except this isn't D&D. This is war(hammer). And besides, D&D has enough problems of is own. I still haven't seen a rule that says same powers (not same rules) don't stack.

 Happyjew wrote:

uberjoras wrote:
I mean, the difference between s6 and s7 is really massive 99 times out of 100 versus t4, so let's make a 13 page thread why your already-powerful marines with beefed up assault cannons in infantry squads can get one more strength in CC, right?

HH cannot stack- it's like casting protection from evil twice in D&D. You can cover more area (models), but you won't give a cumulative benefit for each time you cast it on the same dude, at least not in 6th edition. I believe the rules quoted in this thread, and GW's clear intentions in making sure nothing stacks, proves this point.

Except this isn't D&D. This is war(hammer). And besides, D&D has enough problems of is own. I still haven't seen a rule that says same powers (not same rules) don't stack.

As he has said here, this is a different system entirely. The side supporting the stacking Hammerhand has presented a case that has not been refuted beyond saying "no" and citing the same rule over and over, which they have shown is not applicable. Looking at the ratio of people who have given ACTUAL evidence to Hammerhand stacking, and those who have just said "it doesn't". Earlier, easysauce presented evidence which he believed meant that hammerhand did not stack, however, about 3 or 4 different people, many of whom are commonly seen in these threads and are known by the community as people who know the rules, have shown contrary evidence that has yet to be countered. Bringing a different game like D&D as an example of 40k in this situation is less than useful.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
This thread needs a lock down, bad. The side stating that HH does not stack with itself has patiently cited the rules supporting their position. The side stating that HH does stack with itself seem to be arguing individual words in the English language rather than their actual position. Case in point the post directly above mine.

SJ

Yes, dissecting how a rule is written usually means you need to look at the words used. It is bizarre for you to say otherwise

Oh, and to point out - your entire argument was based on one flaw: that you stated HH was a special rule, or gave a special rule. It isnt, and doesnt. Nothing you said therefore proves your side
The Stacking side has repeatedly shown rules, the anti-stack side have yet to show any actual rules

Jegsar - 2 of the same rule is a combination of rules. {A.A} is a combination that can be made out of the string (A,B,C). Your point is, yet again, refuted.

YOu are fabricating rules by adding words that are not there. Dont

My entire argument might be based on a flaw, however, pg. 32 of the BRB, under "What Special Rules do I Have?", 2nd and 3rd paragraphs, suggests otherwise.

"Similarly a model might get special rules as a result of psychic powers ..."

"When this is the case, the rule that governs the psychic powers ..."

The BRB treats the effects of psychic powers as special rules if the effects bend or change the general rules of the game. Hammerhand changes the rules of the game by granting a benefit to a unit of a +1 Strength bonus that is applied before other modifiers. That is a special rule, as defined on pg. 32 of the BRB. Also stated on pg. 32 of the BRB is that unless otherwise noted, benefits from the same special rule are not cumulative. On pg. 68 of the BRB, we are further reminded that the effects from [b]different]/b] psychic powers are cumulative. Is Hammerhand cast by a Grand Master different from Hammerhand cast by a squad of Purifiers? Same name, same effect, same power, not cumulative per the BRB.

We have an excellent example of another psychic power in the same codex as Hammerhand, on the exact same page as Hammerhand's entry (pg. 25), with the exact same benefit: Might of Titan. Might of Titan grants a +1 Strength bonus to a unit as well as an additional 1d6 penetration versus vehicles, and has a specific note that Might of Titan stacks with Hammerhand. Different name, same effect, different power, is allow to stack with other similar powers per the BRB as well as a specific power per its own entry.

While arguing that psychic powers are not special rules might seem to be a way of disregarding the "non-stacking" side, it is the failure of the "stacking" side to apply the rules as written on pg. 32 of the BRB, pg. 68 of the BRB, and pg. 25 the GK codex in order to support their side as valid. The "non-stackers" have cited repeatedly the rules supporting their side of the argument. The "Stackers" have only cited rules giving permission to resolve powers (which the Non-Stackers do not disagree with) while stating that psychic powers are not special rules. I would challenge the "Stackers" to prove that the benefits of two or more of the same power are cumulative by citing specific rules the support their position; however, those rules do not exist at this time, because it was a 5th Edition FAQ that allowed stacking in the first place, an FAQ that has been superseded by 6th Edition FAQ that makes no mention of same powers stacking yet does point out examples where benefits from the same wargear are not cumulative. Reminder, the BRB treats rules from wargear, psychic powers, scenarios, and terrain that bend or change the general rules of the game to be special rules, which follow the rules listed on pg. 32 of the BRB.

I would say that at this time, this argument is finished.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Is Hammerhand cast by a Grand Master different from Hammerhand cast by a squad of Purifiers?

They are two different powers, as they are cast by two different psykers.

Just like two identical meltaguns are still different meltaguns.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

My entire argument might be based on a flaw, however, pg. 32 of the BRB, under "What Special Rules do I Have?", 2nd and 3rd paragraphs, suggests otherwise.

"Similarly a model might get special rules as a result of psychic powers ..."

"When this is the case, the rule that governs the psychic powers ..."

Where is the special rule Hammerhand defined? Since you (and your side) keeps asserting that it's a special rule, it has to be defined somewhere, right?
Psychic powers can definitely grant special rules. Iron Arm grants one. Endurance grants 2.
I see nothing in any rule citing that all effects from Psychic powers are special rules.

I would say that at this time, this argument is finished.

You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I can't believe that people have been arguing for 13 pages about this. You can't stack identical powers, its written right there in the rulebook in black and white!