Number of powers a psyker can cast

[John Bower]

this is why I think it is still directly affected not this abstract idea people seem to have latched onto. And may I add some of them are the same folks saying the psychic phase is OP now. Of course it is if you let a ML1 psyker start lobbing 3 powers a turn around. They never could before so what makes you think that a slight change in wording makes it any different. Remember that in 6th a psyker "Was always assumed to know the primaris power" - Not sure that is the exact wording but is certainly the gist of it. It's no different now; except for some reason people think that because you know a power means you can lob it around at will. His ML is meant to be the limiting factor; a choice not a given. You can cast for example: Divination or Force. I doubt the intent was to cast both if you are only Level 1; Mastery level really only came in with 6th ed, and even then a level 1 psyker could only lob off 1 power (more limited than now as it had to be a single warp charge power. The difference now is that yes you can pool your dice but that is intended as a way to put impetus into the castings. Do you take a risk to cast that WC 3 spell? You could perils if you use too many dice. I don't think GW intended for a ML 1 psyker to be as powerful as a level 2 psyker; it would make no sense. A level 1 psyker is guaranteed 3 powers. A level 2 psyker conversely is guaranteed to know 3 powers; so why pay the extra points then if you can use all 3 with either? What reason to pay 25/35 extra points for him when the ML1 guy can do the same stuff but cheaper?

[marful]

Remember that in 6th a psyker "Was always assumed to know the primaris power" - Not sure that is the exact wording but is certainly the gist of it.

This was never the case in 6th edition. The only way to gain the Primaris Power was to swap one of your Randomly Generated powers for it.

What reason to pay 25/35 extra points for him when the ML1 guy can do the same stuff but cheaper?

This is a simple answer: More chances to get the power you want from the discipline.

How many points is Invisibility worth to you?


P.S. Holy wall of text batman!

[DarkLink]

"A pskyer can cast a number of powers determined by his mastery level"

End of story. This is quite explicit. The other quote, about continuing to cast psychic powers, refers to the fact that you might have other psykers. It does not give you permission to cast more powers than you have mastery levels.

[daboarder]

End of story. This is quite explicit. The other quote, about continuing to cast psychic powers, refers to the fact that you might have other psykers. It does not give you permission to cast more powers than you have mastery levels.

Not really, it is determined by his mastery level. sure, but only because his mastery level governs the number of powers he knows. nowhere to the rules specifically state that the relationship between powers and ML is a 1 to 1 relationship.

Ahriman can cast 15 powers a turn if he has the right witchfires, because he can attempt to manifest each power up to 3 times. the number of powers he knows is dependent on his mastery level (and hence satisfies that part of the rules) assuming that the dependence means is limited too is wrong.(And is nowhere in the rules)


similarly a ML1 psyker can attempt to manifest 2 powers, as he has 2 powers. His mastery level still determines how many powers he can manifest, its just not that 1 to 1 relationship.

[DarkLink]

Then where did the quote I referenced come from (I actually looked and couldn't find it after a brief look, if it's not in there then I guess cast away).

[Aegwymourn]

The quote is right under the "Mastery Levels" header after the designer's note.

"The number of psychic powers a Psyker can use each turn depends on his Mastery Level." Page thee of the psychic phase with Mobi file. Seems pretty clear to me. Our group has been playing it this way.

[daboarder]

Then where did the quote I referenced come from (I actually looked and couldn't find it after a brief look, if it's not in there then I guess cast away).

Your missing my point. I'll try with a simple example.

Take the statement

a = 2b

It is correct to state that a is dependent on b
It is incorrect to state that a is equal to b

The rules only ever state that the number of powers (a) is dependent on your level (b)

The relationship is later gathered from the rule stating you may attempt each power once. Because the number of powers you know is limited by the ML it is correct to state that the number of powers you may cast is dependent on your ML, but incorrect to state that it is equal to you ML.

In a sense the relationship is like this

a = b +1(if focus) +1(if Force)

Ergo, a is dependent but not equal to b

[marful]

Your missing my point. I'll try with a simple example.

Take the statement

a = 2b

It is correct to state that a is dependent on b
It is incorrect to state that a is equal to b

The rules only ever state that the number of powers (a) is dependent on your level (b)

The relationship is later gathered from the rule stating you may attempt each power once. Because the number of powers you know is limited by the ML it is correct to state that the number of powers you may cast is dependent on your ML, but incorrect to state that it is equal to you ML.

In a sense the relationship is like this

a = b +1(if focus) +1(if Force)

Ergo, a is dependent but not equal to b

Exactly.

Further, in the examples side notes, it mentions specifically a model casting psychic powers repeatedly until the following two conditions:

1.) It has attempted to manifest each one once
2.) It has Warp Charge Points to continue.

[DarkLink]

Your missing my point. I'll try with a simple example.

Simply clarifying that the relationship is based on the number of powers the psyker knows is sufficient. That was where my misunderstanding was.

[daboarder]

Simply clarifying that the relationship is based on the number of powers the psyker knows is sufficient. That was where my misunderstanding was.

sweet all good, honestly was happy for the excuse to put up that simplified example anyway. prevents other issues in the future and is hopefully very clear.