Smash Attacks Discussion

[Tynskel]

uuuuuuuuuh...


division, like multiplication, only applies to root CHARACTERISTICS.


As stated before. Division and subtraction are implicit in their meaning.

[Bean]

I'm actually really confused, at this point, about what this argument is actually about. Is it a question of whether you divide your attacks stat before or after adding in two-weapon and charging bonuses?

[Tynskel]

yeah, you divide your attack characteristic first, because that's the order of operations.

multiply/divide, add/subtract, set bonus.

[Nachodragon]

Division does not apply to only characteristics. Dividing is on page 5 "Dividing to Conquer' which is under the section of "General Principles".

"On occasion, you'll be called upon to divide the result of a dice roll, a characteristic or some other value. Where this happens, any fraction should always be rounded up. So a D6 roll of 3 halved, would be a result of 2 (1.5 rounded up). Similarly, 10% of a unit of twenty-one models, rounded up, would be 3 models."

Page 2 has the modifiers for characteristics. It states:
"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model's characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc), Multiplying it (x2, x3, etc) or even setting setting its value (1, 8, etc)."

There is no talk of division in the multiplying section, there is talk of positive and negative in the adding portion. And when it talks about how to apply those modifiers it does say adding or subtracting. But it does not say anything about halving, dividing, multiplying by .5 or .285749036725.

When GW talks of Multipliers they are talking about more not less. When they talk about less they have a different section for is and they do not call it a multiplier.

[Tynskel]

The smash attack is explicit: Modify the Characteristic. That falls under page 2.

[Nachodragon]

The smash attack is explicit: Modify the Characteristic. That falls under page 2.

Look up the word explicit, cause it does not say "Modify the Characteristic", and the meaning of smash is far from explicit, this conversation would not be happening if it were explicit. You would actually want to say it implicitly states the characteristic is modified. I will grant that it does say "halve the attacks characteristic". But the modifiers section does not cover halving, that is done 3 pages later and covers characteristics, dice rolls and other values.

I have already stated that one understanding of this rule would be 2 Strength 10 attacks and 7 Strength 5 attacks. If you are trying to get more then 2 smash attacks you are trying to cheat by your definition. What happens when you get to attack 3? You have already halved the attacks characteristic and made those smash attacks.

Either the bonus attacks modify the attacks characteristic and you would have 5 Smash attacks or the bonus attacks don't modify the attacks characteristic and you have the 2 and 7 attacks situation.

[Tynskel]

Look up the word explicit, cause it does not say "Modify the Characteristic", and the meaning of smash is far from explicit, this conversation would not be happening if it were explicit. You would actually want to say it implicitly states the characteristic is modified. I will grant that it does say "halve the attacks characteristic". But the modifiers section does not cover halving, that is done 3 pages later and covers characteristics, dice rolls and other values.

I have already stated that one understanding of this rule would be 2 Strength 10 attacks and 7 Strength 5 attacks. If you are trying to get more then 2 smash attacks you are trying to cheat by your definition. What happens when you get to attack 3? You have already halved the attacks characteristic and made those smash attacks.

Either the bonus attacks modify the attacks characteristic and you would have 5 Smash attacks or the bonus attacks don't modify the attacks characteristic and you have the 2 and 7 attacks situation.

the modifiers section DOES cover halving: it is called multiplication. If you understand anything about mathematics, what GW has done with the remainder is created a modulus. So, this is a multiplications with a modulus for numbers less than 1.

This is not cheating, this is FOLLOWING THE RULES.

[Nachodragon]

the modifiers section DOES cover halving: it is called multiplication.

It does not and is not. If they wanted to cover halving/dividing in that section they could have put it their. BUT, they put it in a section that covers more than characteristics. They did not explicitly state how halving affects the order in which it is applied.

Also, my statement still stands about only getting 2 Smash attacks, regardless of how you apply the halving. You can only halve the attacks characteristic twice, and Smash does not state that you get all of those attacks as smash attacks.

In fact, the more I read it, I think you are only getting 1 Smash attack total. "Addiotnally, when making close combat attacks, it can choose to instead make a Smash Attack. If it does so, roll To Hit as normal, but halve its attacks characteristic. A Smash also doubles the model's Strength (to a maximum of 10) for the purposes of that attack. Furthermore, a model making a Smash Attack can re-roll its armor penetration rolls, but must abide by the second result."

So, unless for every Smash attack you make you halve your attacks characteristic it would seem you only get one.

[Tynskel]

that's a load of crock. The justifications that you are coming up with go in the face of everything we know about writing.
The rulebook does not redefine how to read.

Dividing = Multiplication.
The only reason they had to clarify it is due to fractions. If there were no fractions, then they would have never written this at all.

You are halving the characteristic. Apply your maths and order of operations.

Multiply, then add, then set bonus.

Since Divide = Multiply and Subtract = Add, then it simply turns into:

(using the Super Tervigon example)

A*0.5 (Mod +1)
+d3
+d3
+1
and you are done.

[Nachodragon]

I have pointed out this rule can be interpreted a number of different ways.

We all know that GW sucks at writing clearly defined rules. If anyone wants to debate that, look at the section this thread is under.

I don't care to debate this anymore. What will matter is what the FAQ will say, if it is addressed at all. I have more important things I need to do and really don't care to follow this as it is going no where.