Post by FvonSigmaringen on Mar 7, 2018 8:39:35 GMT
I may misread what you are trying to say, but it is not just the base profile that is normally limited to 10. Any characteristic value is composed of the characteristic value on the profile and any boni (or mali) as a result from weapons, spells etc. that are currently in effect. And that value is capped at 10 - unless specified otherwise, of course. If a profile itself has a value higher than 10, then, self-evidently, it has been specified otherwise.
Of course, you can play it as you like, but ruleswise, it is very clear that bonus attacks are a stat increase (and mali a stat decrease) and thus are subject to the value 10 limit.
I don't actually agree with this as it imo breaks RAW. It's not clear at all ruleswise really or there wouldn't be so much debate.
Bloodgreed rule states that if you win combat and already have frenzy you gain an additional attack. It doesn't say you add an additional attack to your profile or mention a cap of the number of additional attacks you can gain.
Hypothetically if you cap Bloodgreed attacks at 10... then proceed to win an additional round of combat..... RAW you gain an additional attack, so ignoring/discarding this in favour of a cap of 10 breaks the RAW per the Beastmen army book.
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Mar 8, 2018 16:48:18 GMT
No need: the rule is quoted in full in the warhammer-empire thread I referenced. And although I was referring to snyggejygge's "bonus attacks that isn't a stat increase we just add on (frenzy, additional weapon etc etc)," where the examples he mentions are in fact stat increases you just add to the Attack characteristic, the same applies to Bloodgreed. To repeat what I said earlier:
- All Attacks are part of the Attack characteristic (as per BRB p. 48) - The Attack characteristic cannot normally exceed 10 (as per BRB p. 3). - However, a random characteristic value can go above 10 (as per FAQ).
If you have a fixed number of Attacks at the start of a round of close combat, this cannot exceed 10. This includes all the Attacks (from whatever source) you actually can count: profile, weapons, active spells, special rules (Frenzy, Blood Fury...)
Attacks from some special rules like Bloodgreed etc. are part of the Attack characteristic, but are not fixed - you do not know at the beginning of a round of close combat how many Attacks that will deliver. Models with such a rule can be said to have a random characteristic value, and thus fall under the FAQ.
This could be just as valid as a total cap on Attacks; and an FAQ seems warranted - but that is unlikely to be forthcoming
And as I said many a time before: unless specified otherwise, normal rules apply - that is why they are the normal rules. So, it is not because the rule does not mention a cap, that the cap does not apply - it is the exact opposite. The rule has to mention specifically that the cap does not apply, otherwise it does.
Post by grandmasterwang on Mar 8, 2018 22:48:17 GMT
Posting the rule anyway so that it's on this forum. I admittedly haven't read through the lengthy Empire forum thread. The fact that its almost 100 posts long shows how contentious the issue is. It's good that you linked it though for anyone who wants to read through a more substantial debate.
Bloodgreed is not a 'normal' case and the way I play matches the background lore (RAI) and the RAW per the Beastmen army book so I am happy to continue playing the way I currently do, it makes the most sense to me.
If the lore stated that Minotaurs and their kin become more and more frenzied the more victims they slaughter....but only to a certain extent whereupon they are frenzied enough I'd be more inclined to play it the way you do.
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Mar 8, 2018 23:01:40 GMT
Fluff has no value in a rules' discussion. Well, it can decide your personal preference for one of two equally valid interpretations of a rule - which is not the case here. Bloodgreed is not a special case - it is a special rule, which, like any other special rule increasing (or lowering for that matter) a characteristic value, does not supersede the cap, unless it specifies that it does so. But it has not, so it does not.
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Mar 9, 2018 9:42:57 GMT
That is a non sequitur. For one, fluff=/= RAI. GW writes its fluff even looser than its rules. I am all for rules that reflect the fluff, but ultimately, it is a game, and the game rules have precedence over any fluff. Let us take some examples.
HE Star Lance: The fluff says that "Legend has it that the Star Lance...cannot be unmade while the fires of Vault's Anvil are still smoldering." Can you draw the conclusion from that that, RAI, it is not subject to Arcane Unforging? Of course not.
Empire: Marius Leitdorf. The Fluff says that he "wields his Runfeang alongside a long dagger." Fluffwise, he should have three attacks with the Runefang and one with the dagger. Except, he has 4 attacks with the Runefang.
The old Empire Dawn Armour was described as "an armour of burnished Estalian steel, enchanted by Gold Wizards so that any damage suffered by it disappears." Did that mean that RAI you could re-roll the re-roll until you made a successful armour save? Of course not.
I am sure, there are such examples in every AB.
And in the case of Greedy Fist, they did reject the RAI, and kept the RAW.
In fact, there is no contradition between "Minotaurs and their kin become more and more frenzied the more victims they slaughter and devour" and the application of all the rules. Each round of CC, you have to calculate the Attack characteristic value: you add all the Attacks from whatever source - which is then capped at 10. So, with each time the Minotaurs win a round of CC, they do gain an additional Attack, but the total number of their Attacks is still capped at 10.
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Mar 10, 2018 9:07:01 GMT
Since we are on the subject:
1. Note that for WS, BS, S & T, the BRB charts simply do not foresee possibility to resolve cases > 10.
2. Even with the cap, a characteristic > 10 is still useful, because there are always hexes or other effects that may lower the value. That said, the BRB does not specify how to calculate the characteristic values. In my view, the easiest and most consistent way would be to add all the boni and mali, and at the end apply the cap, if necessary. I consider this to be a simple calculation, not a sequencing of rules. However, I have noticed others argue that this falls under the Sequencing rule, in which case the player whose turn it is chooses the order of the calculation. That does not change anything in the turn of the controlling player, but the opposing player could first add up all the boni, apply the cap if > 10, and then subtract the mali, leading to a value < 10.