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.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/resolve

the definition of resolve is to make a decision/determine the outcome.

What decision? The power says the unit has +1 Strength. Therefore to resolve the power, the unit must have +1 Strength. If the unit does not have +1 Strength, the power has not been resolved.

This is demonstrably false in the case of say enfeeble. But in this case the unit already has that +1 strength from hammerhand thus as hammerhand has no permission to be resolved cumulatively with itself no further +1 is given from multiple castings thus we never have multiple modifiers.

 Happyjew wrote:

kambien wrote:
6 is incorrect. you don't resolve a power by adding the modifier. You resolve the power by making a decision about the modifier.

What decision? The power says the unit has +1 Strength. Therefore to resolve the power, the unit must have +1 Strength. If the unit does not have +1 Strength, the power has not been resolved.

The unit already has a +1 S from the first Hammerhand. Hammerhand gives a unit a +1 S. If the unit already has a +1 S from Hammerhand, there is no addition effect if more Hammerhands are applied.

Prove Hammerhand is cumulative, and you prove your point.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

kambien wrote:
6 is incorrect. you don't resolve a power by adding the modifier. You resolve the power by making a decision about the modifier.

What decision? The power says the unit has +1 Strength. Therefore to resolve the power, the unit must have +1 Strength. If the unit does not have +1 Strength, the power has not been resolved.

The unit already has a +1 S from the first Hammerhand. Hammerhand gives a unit a +1 S. If the unit already has a +1 S from Hammerhand, there is no addition effect if more Hammerhands are applied.

Prove Hammerhand is cumulative, and you prove your point.

SJ

Already have proven it.

What does resolving hammerhand do? (A: gives +1 Str to the unit).

A second hammerhand would be a second +1 Str to the unit.

Add Page 2 Viola 4+1+1=6

find the restriction, but you can't (And have not produced any rules that restrict the second castings resolution) so they stack, no matter how much you say we need to "Prove Hammerhand is cumulative" we have, you are just ignoring the evidence.

 DeathReaper wrote:


What does resolving hammerhand do? (A: gives +1 Str to the unit).

.

is not the definition of resolve

PrinceRaven wrote:I thought we were arguing about Hammerhand, it doesn't have the "Whilst the power is in effect" wording. Plus the wording is ambiguous, it is possible that "the power" refers to that manifestation of Enfeeble rather than Enfeeble in and of itself. In that interpretation of Enfeeble it would be allowed to stack because you would have multiple powers in effect.

I commented when the subject seemed to stray to general use of psychic powers. I do not know the specific wording of Hammerhand so I have refrained from comment on that power in particular.

kambien wrote:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/resolve

the definition of resolve is to make a decision/determine the outcome.

This is true. By definition, to resolve something is to make a final determination regarding it. But in this case you "resolve the psychic power according to instructions in its entry." Which means the powers entry is the basis for any determinations you will make. By extension this includes the rules for the powers type, shooting rules in the case of witchfires and everything else that may apply. Basically, resolve it according to the rules which are of course what is in dispute.

kambien wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


What does resolving hammerhand do? (A: gives +1 Str to the unit).

.

is not the definition of resolve

It really is...

You need to resolve the power, the only way to do this is to apply the powers effects to the unit.

 DeathReaper wrote:

kambien wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


What does resolving hammerhand do? (A: gives +1 Str to the unit).

.

is not the definition of resolve

It really is...

You need to resolve the power, the only way to do this is to apply the powers effects to the unit.

This is not correct either. You cannot modify the strength or toughness on a vehicle for example. resolve does not mean 'immediately apply all end effects'.

 Abandon wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

kambien wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


What does resolving hammerhand do? (A: gives +1 Str to the unit).

.

is not the definition of resolve

It really is...

You need to resolve the power, the only way to do this is to apply the powers effects to the unit.

This is not correct either. You cannot modify the strength or toughness on a vehicle for example. resolve does not mean 'immediately apply all end effects'.

It means to settle it.

How do you settle Hammerhand on a unit with a Str score, you add 1 to its Str score...

Close, more like a final determination ...and deciding what effects can be applied is a part of that process.

I'd just like to point that rulebook does tell you how to resolve psychic powers - "according to instructions in its entry."

 PrinceRaven wrote:
I'd just like to point that rulebook does tell you how to resolve psychic powers - "according to instructions in its entry."

and to do that with Hammerhand you need to apply a modifier to the unit of +1 Str.

Once you have done this you have to do it again if another hammerhand is cast on the unit which = 4+1+1=6.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
I'd just like to point that rulebook does tell you how to resolve psychic powers - "according to instructions in its entry."

and to do that with Hammerhand you need to apply a modifier to the unit of +1 Str.

Once you have done this you have to do it again if another hammerhand is cast on the unit which = 4+1+1=6.

I'll point out again that while 4+1+1 does equal 6, 4+H+H+H will never equal more than 4+H if H is not cumulative. Prove H is cumulative.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
I'd just like to point that rulebook does tell you how to resolve psychic powers - "according to instructions in its entry."

and to do that with Hammerhand you need to apply a modifier to the unit of +1 Str.

Once you have done this you have to do it again if another hammerhand is cast on the unit which = 4+1+1=6.

I'll point out again that while 4+1+1 does equal 6, 4+H+H+H will never equal more than 4+H if H is not cumulative. Prove H is cumulative.

SJ

We already have, you are ignoring it. It is not 4+h as resolving H "according to instructions in its entry." has us apply a +1 Str.

We have permission to cast and resolve hammerhand "according to instructions in its entry." and as per the instructions we apply a +1 Str modifier.

We have permission to cast and resolve hammerhand "according to instructions in its entry." again on the same target and as per the instructions we apply a +1 Str modifier.

We look to page two since we have two +1 modifiers and it tells us to add them together. therefore 4+1+1=6

Find the restriction.

But there is no restriction, so you will not be able to find one. Therefore your argument is not correct.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
I'd just like to point that rulebook does tell you how to resolve psychic powers - "according to instructions in its entry."

and to do that with Hammerhand you need to apply a modifier to the unit of +1 Str.

Once you have done this you have to do it again if another hammerhand is cast on the unit which = 4+1+1=6.

I'll point out again that while 4+1+1 does equal 6, 4+H+H+H will never equal more than 4+H if H is not cumulative. Prove H is cumulative.

SJ

We already have, you are ignoring it. It is not 4+h as resolving H "according to instructions in its entry." has us apply a +1 Str.

We have permission to cast and resolve hammerhand "according to instructions in its entry." and as per the instructions we apply a +1 Str modifier.

We have permission to cast and resolve hammerhand "according to instructions in its entry." again on the same target and as per the instructions we apply a +1 Str modifier.

We look to page two since we have two +1 modifiers and it tells us to add them together. therefore 4+1+1=6

Find the restriction.

But there is no restriction, so you will not be able to find one. Therefore your argument is not correct.

We only have permission to apply H to a model. If H is cumulative, then 4+H is 4+[1+1+1+ ...]. If H is not cumulative, 4+H is 4+[1] no matter how many times H is cast. Permission to resolve is not permission to be cumulative. Permission to be cumulative is permission to be cumulative. Hammerhand lacks language affirming it is cumulative. You have not proven Hammerhand is cumulative.

SJ

And you have not proved that psychic powers require specific permission to be resolved cumulatively. Don't just handwave this with "permissive ruleset" because that is not what it means, a permissive ruleset means you need permission to do things and we have permission to cast and resolve Hammerhand according to its entry.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
And you have not proved that psychic powers require specific permission to be resolved cumulatively. Don't just handwave this with "permissive ruleset" because that is not what it means, a permissive ruleset means you need permission to do things and we have permission to cast and resolve Hammerhand according to its entry.

So you missed the three times written "unless otherwise noted, different powers are cumulative" phrase on pg. 68?

SJ

Just got my hands on the power entry for Hammerhand, noticed an amendment indicating that it happens at the start of the fight subphase after a glance over the GK FAQ... is there any other material regarding this power?

If not I'd have to say Hammerhand does not stack... but it does not have to. Hammerhand happens instantly, you use the power, make your psychic test and then it's over. It does not linger for any duration like a blessing or a malediction. If that test is made they get +1S and that is the only lasting part of the whole chain of cause and effect. So yeah, you can't even try to stack Hammerhand, only the modifiers it creates stick around for any duration, and those definitely stack.

Saying you're stacking Hammerhands is like saying you're stacking Smites... well the modifiers/wounds add up... but the powers never directly overlap so you can't ever really say that happens.

...but if it helps people think of it more easily... sure, you can say they stack.... it's not 100% correct but it's close enough.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
And you have not proved that psychic powers require specific permission to be resolved cumulatively. Don't just handwave this with "permissive ruleset" because that is not what it means, a permissive ruleset means you need permission to do things and we have permission to cast and resolve Hammerhand according to its entry.

So you missed the three times written "unless otherwise noted, different powers are cumulative" phrase on pg. 68?

SJ

I must have missed the part that says "unless otherwise noted, multiple manifestation of the same power are not cumulative"
What about the Haywire effect from Objuration Mechanicum, the mind controlling of Puppet Master, the shooting from various witchfires? Are these also subject to this restriction on cumulative psychic powers you have imagined?

Come to think of it, saying the modifiers from Hammerhand don't stack would be like saying wounds from 'same' witchfires don't stack. In fact they likely intentionally left out any rule that the effects of 'same' powers don't stack to avoid any absurd arguments like that.

My stance on blessings/maledictions remains the same but Hammerhand is neither of those. In MTG terms it's more like an instant as opposed to an enchantment.

 Abandon wrote:
Come to think of it, saying the modifiers from Hammerhand don't stack would be like saying wounds from 'same' witchfires don't stack. In fact they likely intentionally left out any rule that the effects of 'same' powers don't stack to avoid any absurd arguments like that.

My stance on blessings/maledictions remains the same but Hammerhand is neither of those. In MTG terms it's more like an instant as opposed to an enchantment.

So you are in agreement that Psychic powers can stack?

What about Terrify, if you cast Terrify from two different psykers how many Morale checks must the unit take? (A: should be two)

Or Gate of Infinity, can two psykers both cast GoI when attached to a single unit? (A: should be Yes)

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
And you have not proved that psychic powers require specific permission to be resolved cumulatively. Don't just handwave this with "permissive ruleset" because that is not what it means, a permissive ruleset means you need permission to do things and we have permission to cast and resolve Hammerhand according to its entry.

So you missed the three times written "unless otherwise noted, different powers are cumulative" phrase on pg. 68?

SJ

So you missed that "unless otherwise noted, different powers are cumulative" (68) does not say [Same powers are not cumulative]?


Since you can not find a restriction you must concede the argument, as you literally have no rules backing.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
Come to think of it, saying the modifiers from Hammerhand don't stack would be like saying wounds from 'same' witchfires don't stack. In fact they likely intentionally left out any rule that the effects of 'same' powers don't stack to avoid any absurd arguments like that.

My stance on blessings/maledictions remains the same but Hammerhand is neither of those. In MTG terms it's more like an instant as opposed to an enchantment.

So you are in agreement that Psychic powers can stack?

What about Terrify, if you cast Terrify from two different psykers how many Morale checks must the unit take? (A: should be two)

Or Gate of Infinity, can two psykers both cast GoI when attached to a single unit? (A: should be Yes)

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
And you have not proved that psychic powers require specific permission to be resolved cumulatively. Don't just handwave this with "permissive ruleset" because that is not what it means, a permissive ruleset means you need permission to do things and we have permission to cast and resolve Hammerhand according to its entry.

So you missed the three times written "unless otherwise noted, different powers are cumulative" phrase on pg. 68?

SJ

So you missed that "unless otherwise noted, different powers are cumulative" (68) does not say [Same powers are not cumulative]?


Since you can not find a restriction you must concede the argument, as you literally have no rules backing.

Saying "it does not say same powers are not cumulative" is the same as saying "it does doesn't say I can't", which in a permissive rule set is a fallacy. You cannot find any mention of "same powers are cumulative" because no such permission exists. The only permission written is "different powers are cumulative unless otherwise noted", and there are specific powers that do note they are cumulative. However, most powers do not contain verbiage affirming those powers are cumulative. Without such affirmation, per the rules as written, those powers are not cumulative with multiple casting. The comparison to wounding is a false argument, because detailed wounding rules exist in the basic rules of the game that are not superseded by any rules presented under a psychic power (so far). The comparison to Witchfires is false, because Witchfires deal with wounding, and tend to lack secondary effects. Yet even in the instance of a non-wounding secondary Witchfire effect, that effect would be subject to the same restrictions as other psychic powers.

Let me ask you this: How many Difficult Terrain tests must a model make that has three Enfeebles on it? One? Three? Prove your answer with the rules.

SJ

The thing is, rules for applying modifiers also exists, but according to people on this threat they are superseded by a restriction on resolving psychic powers if you have already resolved a psychic power of the same name on the unit in question, so why does this restriction arbitrarily supersede modifiers but not shooting attacks for any reason other than it being a made up restriction and therefore subject to made up rules?

As for your question, once, because "If any models in a unit start their move in difficult terrain, they are affected by the terrain and must take a Difficult Terrain test." You see, unlike the strength modifier from Hammerhand, treating terrain as difficult is binary, you cannot treat terrain as being more difficult than it is, but you can increase a unit's Strength further than you already have (until it reaches Strength 10).

The thing is, rules for applying modifiers also exists, but according to people on this threat they are superseded by a restriction on resolving psychic powers if you have already resolved a psychic power of the same name on the unit in question, so why does this restriction arbitrarily supersede modifiers but not shooting attacks for any reason other than it being a made up restriction and therefore subject to made up rules?

Wounds are cumulative because they say they are. Modifiers are cumulative because they say they are. Psychic powers are not cumulative with themselves because they don't say they are. They say they are cumulative with different psychic powers.

So Smite is not cumulative with itself then?

People that think that psychic powers stack must believe one of these two things is true:

1) Whoever wrote the Psychic PPowers rules did not know the psychic powers rules.
2) whoever wrote the psychic powers rules wanted to deliberately mislead the reader.

The "different psychic powers are cumulative" is just a reminder argument. Is frankly bizarre as a reminder. It would be like in the Overwatch rules writing "overwatch shots are snap shots, so you fire at bs1, however you may not fire weapons with the large blast type". The implication of that sentence is that you can fire blast weapons (which RaW you still couldn't) so you would only write that if you were unaware that snap shots prevent all blast and large blast weapons or you are trying to intentionally miss lead the reading into thinking they can fire blast weapons when they can't. This repeated "reminder" makes just as much sense as a reminder.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
No but smite is a shooting attack and thus follows the rules from that. Thus the wounds caused would accumulate.

It would be like special rules writing "Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule more than once." If things are automatically restricted to not be cumulative that statement is a reminder, if things are not automatically restricted to not be cumulative then the "different powers are cumulative" is a reminder, either way we have a reminder.

That's exactly like saying "Hammerhand is a modifier and thus follows the rules from that. Thus the strength gained is cumulative." Smite is a psychic power resolved as a shooting attack, Hammerhand is a psychic power resolved as a strength modifier. If you're going to enforce this restriction you believe is part of the rules at least be consistent.

So just to clarify what are you saying? Did the writer of the psychic powers rules not know the psychic powers rules or were they intentionally trying to mislead us?

I believe the people who write the rules are flawed and not as interested in producing a high-quality product as other rules designers. So while it may not be intentional, they do make misleading mistakes.

It would be like special rules writing "Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule more than once." If things are automatically restricted to not be cumulative that statement is a reminder

It would be like saying "Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule that starts with the letter "S" more than once."

That would imply all other special rules would be cumulative. I'm not saying they don't put reminders in rules but to suggest they put this reminder in the rules means one of the following is true:

1) Whoever wrote the Psychic PPowers rules did not know the psychic powers rules.
2) whoever wrote the psychic powers rules wanted to deliberately mislead the reader.

Which is it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

So while it may not be intentional, they do make misleading mistakes.

This is not a misleading mistake. They have written that "different powers" they have singled out different powers if they meant all powers why on earth would they single out different ones. I am genuinely interested in why you think they wrote that.