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.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Page two is a mechanic for many things, it is not however permission for accumulation of effects.

And here is where your argument falls apart when dealing with Multiple +1 modifiers.

Re-read page 2.

If I had multiple modifiers, say from two different Psychic powers effects like iron arm and might of titans, I would consult page two. But I am dealing with modifiers from two manifestations of the same powers effects, which I have no permission in the psyker section to accumulate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tell you what, if you can find any permission for the same powers effect to be cumulative that is just as definitive as the permission for different powers effects to be cumulative in the psyker section or grey knight codex I will concede. Till then I will stick to reading the rules with the base idea that nothing is permitted unless the rules state it is.

 Bausk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Page two is a mechanic for many things, it is not however permission for accumulation of effects.

And here is where your argument falls apart when dealing with Multiple +1 modifiers.

Re-read page 2.

If I had multiple modifiers, say from two different Psychic powers effects like iron arm and might of titans, I would consult page two. But I am dealing with modifiers from two manifestations of the same powers effects, which I have no permission in the psyker section to accumulate.

Ok, so which step of manifesting the psychic power is denied permission?

 Bausk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Page two is a mechanic for many things, it is not however permission for accumulation of effects.

And here is where your argument falls apart when dealing with Multiple +1 modifiers.

Re-read page 2.

If I had multiple modifiers, say from two different Psychic powers effects like iron arm and might of titans, I would consult page two. But I am dealing with modifiers from two manifestations of the same powers effects, which I have no permission in the psyker section to accumulate.

Yes you do. Where is the denial? Cite it.

 Bausk wrote:
2) Permission is granted for many psykers to manifest the same power with the same target. Absolutely correct, however it may be pointless.

Why would it be pointless, do you have a rules quote that tells restricts multiples of the same power from resolving its effects?

We are instructed to "resolve the psychic power according to instructions in its entry. " (68)

According to Hammerhand we apply a +1 modifier to the units Strength.

Please, just once, cite a restriction on this. Some actual rule that restricts you from resolving a second or third casting of Hammerhand.

If you do not provide a quote, as per the tenets of the forum, I will have to assume youa re arguing How you would play it and not arguing RAW.

For the last time, denial doesn't exist in a permissive rule set. Only permissions with limitations or restrictions.

For instance the movement phase. We assume no permission to even move the unit from the start. The rules grant us permission to move the unit but then restrict us to the units listed maximum movement. It also gives us permission to not move at all and permission to move less than the units maximum movement.

Each facet of the rules is based on this abundantly simple concept. I have shown permission for different powers effects to be cumulative in the relevant section of the rules. I have also shown that at no point in the relevant rules are we given permission for the same powers effect to be cumulative.

The onus is not mine to prove denial where none should exist. The onus is yours to prove permission exists.

We have proved permission for every single step of manifesting and resolving the power.

You, meanwhile, have yet to show any support for your argument whatsoever apart from that you think it works that way.

So am I to infer you have a different interpretation of what a permissive rule set is?

Please enlighten us.

A permissive ruleset is one in which denial is assumed for everything you wish to do. This assumption can be overrided by a rule that grants permission, which is in turn overriden by a rule which provides denial, which can be overturned by a rule that grants specific permission to ignore the denial, which can then be overturned by a rule that specifically denies this specific permission. For instance:

1. It is the assault phase after assault moves but before blows are struck, my Psyker has a warp charge available and has not used used Hammerhand this turn, so I have permission to manifest Hammerhand. - "This power is used during the Assault phase in either's player turn, after assault moves have been made, but before any blows are struck."

2. I have permission to follow the usual steps for manifesting a psychic power in pages 67=68 as my Librarian is a Psyker.

3. I have permission to resolve the power according to instructions in its entry. - "Assuming that the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not nullify it through a successful Deny the \Witch roll, you can now resolve the psychic power according to instructions in its entry."

4. The Hammerhand entry instructs me to apply +1 Strength to the unit, so I do. - "If the psychic test is passed, all models in the unit (including independent characters) have +1 Strength until the end of the Assault phase."

5. The unit already has had Hammerhand cast on it, so I have 2 +1 Strength modifiers, following the rules for multiple modifiers, Each model's current strength is now +2. - "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."

Observe how I have permission to do each step, since I have rules-based permission I override any assumptions of denial and it requires an actual rule to deny permission.

Denial is absolutely required in a permissive ruleset.

For example, I have blanket permission to move models. However, an immobilized vehicle has had it's permission removed denied.

So, through Hammerhand, we have blanket permission to add +1 strength (given that you pass a psychic check, et al).

You'd have to find a denial to prevent it from working.

PR: Step three, you have permission to resolve the power following the rules for resolving a psychic power in which only permits different powers effects to be cumulative. I say only as it is the only mention of powers effects being cumulative and as such is the only rule for powers effects being permitted to be cumulative. Just thought I would point that out seeing as you missed it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unit: Immobilization is removal/revocation of permission which is not the same as denial.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lets use that though. For there to be a removal/revocation of permission for same powers effects to be cumulative there first must be permission that is not assumed.

There is no denial of permission either, so we continue to resolve the power according to its entry, as we have permission to do so.

 Bausk wrote:
Lets use that though. For there to be a removal/revocation of permission for same powers effects to be cumulative there first must be permission that is not assumed.

We have permission to resolve the power.

The power grants +1 strength.

If you cast the power twice, you have permission to resolve the power both times.

The power grands +1 strength, twice.

If you cast the power three times, you have permission to resolve the power all three times.

The power grants +1 strength, three times.

PR: That's the dakka equivalent of a child's response. You stated the default state of permission in a permissive rule set is no permission. If no permission is given and no permission is removed/revoked then the default of no permission is what you have.

Unit: We have permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative. Resolution can be to no additional effect or no effect at all.

Permission is given to resolve the power, denial of resolution is not given apart from assumptions. Since the permission is rules-based and the denial is assumption-based the permission wins because rules always trump assumptions in a permissive ruleset.

 Bausk wrote:
Unit: We have permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative. Resolution can be to no additional effect or no effect at all.

Is there a reason to expect it would have a different (or no) effect on subsequent resolutions than it did on the first?

 Bausk wrote:
PR: Step three, you have permission to resolve the power following the rules for resolving a psychic power in which only permits different powers effects to be cumulative. I say only as it is the only mention of powers effects being cumulative and as such is the only rule for powers effects being permitted to be cumulative. Just thought I would point that out seeing as you missed it.

(Emphasis mine).
Fixed that for you.

I struck through your error. The word only should not be there. In fact the rule that "permits different powers effects to be cumulative" has nothing to do with the same power. Why do you keep citing that?

If we have permission to cast and resolve a power that gives a modifier, if we cast that power twice we are left with multiple modifiers since the rules say to resolve each power. Page 2 then kicks in and permits us to apply any additions by the rules of basic math. Ergo 4+1+1=6.

Since you can not find any restrictions in the rule book, please follow the tenets of the forum and mark your posts How you would play it.

PR: You're still assuming permission to be cumulative fom just resolution, whereas in the rules for resolution we only have one reference on what is or is not permitted to be cumulative.

Unit: Same answer as PR.

DR: I have said previous to this the reason Ipreface the statement with only and it is because it is the only reference in the psyker rules section pertaining to accumulation. As it is the only statement on the matter the it is the only permission for accumulation we have.

I have blanket permission to resolve, therefore I have permission to resolve even if Hammerhand has already been manifested on the unit.

PR: Permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative. Especially when different effects are given explicit permission and same effects are not.

I'm making no assumptions, I'm stating I have permission to resolve and there is no rules-based denial based on non-cumulativity. The assumption of not being cumulative cannot trump rules-based permission to resolve and apply the effects.

 Bausk wrote:
PR: Permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative.

It does when the rule states you use a naturally cumulative/stacking symbol.
Or does the game define "+" as being something other than the standard usage? (It doesn't)
If they didn't want it to be stacking, they shouldn't have used "+" as it is by it's very nature stacking.

Also you're not looking for permission. You're looking for a double permission, which just isn't needed.
Permission is given through every single step to apply a subsequent modifiers. Yet you want a second permission on top of all this. Something saying it's allowed, when each step already allows it.
It's not needed.

The OP solved his problem on page1. Do you really still want to beat this dead horse on and on and on? Remember that the new edition will come anyway so no need to still argue points that have already been discussed to death. There will be a lot of new bloated rules to tear us apart over in ~3 weeks hopefully.

 Mywik wrote:
The OP solved his problem on page1. Do you really still want to beat this dead horse on and on and on? Remember that the new edition will come anyway so no need to still argue points that have already been discussed to death. There will be a lot of new bloated rules to tear us apart over in ~3 weeks hopefully.

Ah well, it's entertaining to see the con-stacking side struggling to find anything supporting their opinion, desperately grasping for straws. It's another example of a thread where the correct answer was on page 1 and then, endless, pointless debating started.

tl;dr: Hammerhand stacks with itself if cast by a different psyker. Detailed explanations have been provided above multiple times.

 Bausk wrote:
PR: Permission to resolve does not equate to permission to be cumulative. Especially when different effects are given explicit permission and same effects are not.

First: please stop misspelling my name.
Second: I have permission to resolve both powers.
This resolution uses mathematical instructions.
Where in the rulebook would I go to find how to handle the maths involved?

 Sigvatr wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Unless anyone comes up with an exact quote from the BRB that says that psychic powers are special rules, every single point you try to make is a waste of time.

So every model in the game can use psychic powers ?

Read the posts. You don't know what "special rules" means. "Special Rules" does NOT mean that it's a special rule if you use "special" as an everyday term. Special rules in Warhammer 40k are explicitely given by the BRB itself as pointed out in my previous posts.

Please refer to the tennets of YMDC:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

Especially this:

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

So you had no answer ? Instead run off on a tangent about the tenets. Nothing in my question referenced a "definition". Perhaps you can stay on topic rather than cite the tenets. But I noticed your falling back on that to multiple threads, obviously your argument is falling apart that you've gone on such a defensive.

Ask a proper question and you will certainly get an answer. If you don't know where to find a unit's special rules or don't know what a certain rule means, open a thread in YMDC and ask for it. I'd be glad to help you out. Feel free to PM me as well if you need help with something and I might be able to help you out.

I'm not wasting my breath on rhetorical questions, though.

The rhetorical question had a point, which shows how incorrect you were in your statement about Special Rules. But I can see you dont care to be shown how wrong you are.

Unless you want to rebutt anything someone else mentions with actual rules, you missed the point of YMDC.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Fragile wrote:
So every model in the game can use psychic powers ?

Every model that has the special rule psyker can.

You need a special rule to cast Psychic powers.

Psychic powers themselves though are not special rules.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
I have blanket permission to resolve, therefore I have permission to resolve even if Hammerhand has already been manifested on the unit.

making it to the resolve step is not blanket permission for effect.

I can go through all of the steps to resolve any psychic shooting attack as long as the target is in line of sight.

There is no requirement for range under declare target or any of the other steps to resolve a psychic attack.

Therefore you can reach resolve psychic attack for a psychic shooting attack that is out of range, using your logic that making it to resolve step means the power has to have an effect now means psychic shooting attacks all have unlimited range.

obviously they do not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Mywik wrote:
The OP solved his problem on page1. Do you really still want to beat this dead horse on and on and on? Remember that the new edition will come anyway so no need to still argue points that have already been discussed to death. There will be a lot of new bloated rules to tear us apart over in ~3 weeks hopefully.

Ah well, it's entertaining to see the con-stacking side struggling to find anything supporting their opinion, desperately grasping for straws. It's another example of a thread where the correct answer was on page 1 and then, endless, pointless debating started.

tl;dr: Hammerhand stacks with itself if cast by a different psyker. Detailed explanations have been provided above multiple times.

so despite your opinion not being RAW.

How do you resolve the RAW that different characteristic bonus and penalties stack?

And no mention that ones from the same source do stack.

Do you believe that bit of RAW was intentionally put in there as a red herring?

blaktoof, how are you nominating a unit that is out of range for a psychic power?