GW grammar woes

[GrFlur]

 

I think we can agree the obvious intent in the example is to have the spell be treated as a modifier to be applied concurrently as the power fist's modifier. As the OP, I didn't challenge the intent, just how GW got there by their example. Changing characteristics on principle is not the same as  applying a situational modifier, and such language should be used judiciously.

.

The rules don't differentiate these. Any modification is treated the same and are cumulatively applied. Seems easy to go, "this model is getting a +1 from this and a x2 from this and here is the answer". The order of the buffs and where they originate from doesn't matter. It's always the same way to combine them.

Not sure why following the normal order of operations for math is unintuitive. 

 

 

So the "while" part in the quoted GW by me isn't an indicator that the +1 goes first before the x2 of the power fist... I mean "while" means that it's already in efect  when  the power fist enters in action... I'm not a native english speaker, so my understanding could be judged by translations issues :/

[Fajita Fan]

Instead of trying to use some form of PEMDAS should they have just done something like this:

 

Base model strength -> weapon mod -> unit rule -> army rule -> spell/buff effect

 

You’d be calculating this from the bottom up so a marine who is getting several buffs you go:

Base S4 -> powerfist x2 -> hypothetical unit buff -> hypothetical army buff -> hypothetical spell or combat drug effect

 

Genestealer cults have an army buff that gives them +1S in cc, then you could have something like an aberrant with a power hammer and then some kind of psychic effect or drugs from their doctor.

 

This way you’d also have enemy psychic effects going last and modifying a units final score, not worrying about mathematical order of operations.

[Panzer]

Why though? There's not really any advantage doing it the one way or another but with your suggestion one would need to memorize some arbitrary order of things instead of simply applying basic maths.

Edited August 1, 2020 by Panzer

[Rogue]

It's not really arbitrary, though (well, Fajita Fan's suggestion kinda is, but the way lots of people mistakenly apply things isn't).

 

Usually, we tend to follow the logical progression of events. For example:

 

My aberrants are S4. Twisted Helix makes them S5 at the start of the game. In my psychic phase I cast Might from Beyond on them, so now they're S6. In the fight phase I hit something with a hammer - a hammer is strength times 2, and my strength is currently 6, so I multiply it up to S12. That's a perfectly logical progession.

 

The GW approved method is mathematically accurate, but means that I need to remember that my aberrants are really S4, even when they're functionally S5 or S6, so that I can go back, apply the multiplier to S4, then add back on the strength buffs I already added earlier.

 

Mathematically, this might be correct, but it's not the intuitive way to do it.

 

And for some people, the ordering of multipliers before addition is as arbitrary as anything else. If you're not a maths person, having to remember BODMAS is likely trickier than just following the turn sequence and applying buffs as they come up.

[Fajita Fan]

Why though? There's not really any advantage doing it the one way or another but with your suggestion one would need to memorize some arbitrary order of things instead of simply applying basic maths.

Because I thought the whole point of GW's steady simplification (read: dumbing down) of rules over the years was due to their assumption there are hordes of children trying to learn this game.  The 4th edition SM codex had a cool build-your-own-chapter matrix that was streamlined (read: removed) because it was too hard to children to build their SM lists.  Why try to build in some oddly worded PEMDAS system when you can just build a flow chart of stat mods?  When I first started in 3rd edition I totally botched powerfist strength with other buffs, by having a flow chart they could then logically build new buffs or psychic powers without worrying about incompatibilities needing FAQ changes down the road. 

 

Remember if this becomes too complex they may just get rid of stat modifications entirely in 10th edition to further simplify or streamline it.  

[Panzer]

 

Why though? There's not really any advantage doing it the one way or another but with your suggestion one would need to memorize some arbitrary order of things instead of simply applying basic maths.

Because I thought the whole point of GW's steady simplification (read: dumbing down) of rules over the years was due to their assumption there are hordes of children trying to learn this game.  The 4th edition SM codex had a cool build-your-own-chapter matrix that was streamlined (read: removed) because it was too hard to children to build their SM lists.  Why try to build in some oddly worded PEMDAS system when you can just build a flow chart of stat mods?  When I first started in 3rd edition I totally botched powerfist strength with other buffs, by having a flow chart they could then logically build new buffs or psychic powers without worrying about incompatibilities needing FAQ changes down the road. 

 

Remember if this becomes too complex they may just get rid of stat modifications entirely in 10th edition to further simplify or streamline it.  

 

 

You do realise that most children learn pemdas in their 4th grade, right?

[Fajita Fan]

Sure, and I don't find the rules all that hard but look at how many FAQs you need to carry around a couple of years after GW's rules come out.  You end up with so many clarifications, changes, and unintended consequences that a simple flow chart helps the players understand RAI while making sure the designers keep their RAW consistent. 

[Inquisitor lorr]

 

 

 

 

Why though? There's not really any advantage doing it the one way or another but with your suggestion one would need to memorize some arbitrary order of things instead of simply applying basic maths.

Because I thought the whole point of GW's steady simplification (read: dumbing down) of rules over the years was due to their assumption there are hordes of children trying to learn this game. The 4th edition SM codex had a cool build-your-own-chapter matrix that was streamlined (read: removed) because it was too hard to children to build their SM lists. Why try to build in some oddly worded PEMDAS system when you can just build a flow chart of stat mods? When I first started in 3rd edition I totally botched powerfist strength with other buffs, by having a flow chart they could then logically build new buffs or psychic powers without worrying about incompatibilities needing FAQ changes down the road.

 

Remember if this becomes too complex they may just get rid of stat modifications entirely in 10th edition to further simplify or streamline it.

You do realise that most children learn pemdas in their 4th grade, right?

What is this Pemdas heresy - I assume you all mean BODMAS? ;)

[Ascanius]

Oooooh, you want grammar woes?

 

RedemPTOR.

 

AbsolvOr.

 

What are we talking about, here?

 

The normal English words for these things would be "redeemer" and "absolver", but redemptor is the correct Latin translation of "redeemer" (ask a Catholic priest!) and while absolvor is not exactly the correct noun form of absolvo, the pattern is recognisable - and High Gothic isn't Latin anyway.

[chapter master 454]

Sadly any system you think is fool-proof isn't as there will always be a fool to prove you wrong.

 

In this circumstance I feel however this system works the best as it requires the least amount of in-game mechanics to be explained instead of where in 8th, some stat mods stacked and became better on multiplier weapons. Thus you had to create your own sub-category of "existing buffs" followed by "weapon buffs" and it got messy. Its how I managed to create that 22 strength abominant.

 

However with this system it has grounding in standard math procedure that MOST people should know...I would hope. There will be people needing clarification due to needing to fully iron out the transition from 8th but ultimately if GW can settle on a system for an edition or two we might get somewhere with it.

Ultimately it means giving your dudes with x2 strength weapons the +1 strength buff isn't as impactful as it once was. Still good for marines (strength 9 is good against heavier armour) but overall it does mean you can't reach absurd levels of strength now. This does mean sadly catachan commanders with power fists are strength 7 not 8 but oh well, they already punch way about their belt class anyway!

[Gederas]

Oooooh, you want grammar woes?

 

RedemPTOR.

 

AbsolvOr.

What are we talking about, here?

 

The normal English words for these things would be "redeemer" and "absolver", but redemptor is the correct Latin translation of "redeemer" (ask a Catholic priest!) and while absolvor is not exactly the correct noun form of absolvo, the pattern is recognisable - and High Gothic isn't Latin anyway.

Wow, thanks!

 

And here I thought they were the english words mangled to "sound cool". For some reason it never crossed my mind that it's latin / high gothic.

Feelin' much better about them now!

Yup. Every single Primaris unit is an actual word, either in English (Reiver, Suppressor, Inceptor, Eradicator etc) or Latin (Redemptor)

[BitsHammer]

It's because people forget Order of Operations for mathematics (non-algebraic), so GW had to reinforce that the game runs off of PEMDAS, and had to do it in the bluntest possible way to avoid confusion, whether unintentional or intentional.

In all fairness, people were still applying PEMDAS, but they were doing the characteristic seperate from things that modified it's attack strength.