Does Unnatural streanght and hammerhand stack. For example we have a monster with str 52, with unnatural streanght x 2 and the psy power hammerhand, which multiply the streanght bonus by 4. If treated literally then such a monster will have the streanght monifier of 40 (5x2x4). That seems a little to owerpowered. Was this or similar question adressed already? What do you think?

Yes. Unnatural Strength will multiply the Strength Bonus a certain number of times. And Hammerhand seem to focus on the Strength Bonus, multiplying it even further. So if you have a creature with Unnatural Strength (*2) and the creature has a Strength value of 52, then that Strength Bonus would first be multiplied by two (making it 10) and the power Hammerhand (if successful) would multiply that into 40 if it multiplies SB by 4. Giving the creature a total SB of 40 as long as the power is in effect.

I wouldn't want to be punched by that creature. It could litteraly knock a Land Raider aside if it wanted to.

You might treat Hammerhand as if it granted the equivalent Unnatural Strength 4 instead. Unnatural Strength 2 would then be simply an additional application of thre trait, making the bonus 5.

I'm sure the PCs will be comforted by the prospect of a creature whose strength is "only" five times what nature intended...

Terentz said:

Is this monster one that you created or is it premade from a book?

Hodgepodge said:

But it wouldn't even be nearly as scary as the first monster with a Strength Bonus of 40, like the rules intended now would it?

Varnias Tybalt said:

Hahaha, no.

This explains The Ring, by the way. Unbound Daemonhost, Unnatural Strength (x3), Hammerhand... likes pretending to be a little girl.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Don't worry, it's primitive damage

Add the Improved Natural Weapon trait - scarry thing!!!!

Jlid said:

Nor created nor from the book - just a thought about creation of NPC. But the possibility exist and is still legal. Be it Demonhost, some deamons, or even Space Marine Librarian. That combionation literally open the tanks as cans. In fact it is what it meant to do. Scarry thing indeed.

Heh, i did something like that to my players. The creature was about knee high, looked like an Ewok (fluffy little Star Wars aliens) and had the annoying tendency to sneak into their tents and steal the interesting stuff. Three nights of that on Dusk and one of the players snapped and punched one of them...seconds later he enjoyed a nice little flight through the woods. And of course burned a fate point. Convenient little pond at the end of the flight kept him from going splat.

The looks on their faces! I even had a camera prepared just for that moment.

Bilateralrope said:

Uhm, that isn't calming in the slightest. a GUARANTEED damage of 40 plus any eventual D5's or D10's. Let's say you're wearing power armour. Against primitive damage it provides a protection for 16 points. Couple that with a nasty Toughness bonus like 5 or 6, you can soak up 21 or 22 points of damage without losing wounds. so 40 somethng minus 22. That still nets a damage of 18.

... Hope you bought Sound Constitution when you had the chance lads.

Of course, one can turn this in one's own favour. Consider a Dusk World Psyker. Our shamanistic friend rolls with a base of 25 str and 17 WP (23 with Living Nightmare). A few good rolls and perhaps a characteristic advance (pricey for Str, but worth it) and we have over 40 of each. At Rating 3, he takes Hammerhand and at 4 he takes Burning Fist.

With those two Powers active, his fists are 1d10+16 E weapons without the primitive quality.

If he managed to start with over 40 Str, it would be well worth the 2500 xp to upgrade to 60 strength for 1d10+24.

Granted, really high armor might dull the magic. But not very much. And if it's really a problem, well, that's what Molten Man is for. Or possibly Power Fists. Also, Cellular Control and Power Armor just make all this really nasty.

Obviously, it would be best if our Shaman escapes Dusk sane and pure enough for the Temple Calix, but he can probably get by fine as a Savant. The Guard tends to find room for Psykers who can rip a tank in half in the name of the Sky Emperor. (Preferably away from the actually sane Guardsmen, mind you).

Oh, and I forgot the +10 Str from Frenzy, which is probably the way to go with this guy, especially as a Savant.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Unless you're one of the developers don't try to couch your favorite interpretation as "like the rules intended"

Yes the 5x2x4 interpretation is one that can be made from how the text was written. But one must consider several things in making this decision. 1) this is a book that has had to have 2 (or is it 3?) sets of errata so far to clarify various things and fix screw-ups. 2) in discussing how multipliers stack in just about every other aspect of the system it seems to work where multipliers add together rather than multiply one another. As x2 is one level of modifier when added to x4 that gives you x5 as discussed above.

Now you can go with whichever interpretation and/or mathmatical model fits the style of game you want to run better, but just because you like absurdly cranked up multipliers mulitplying multipliers don't try to tell us its what "the rules intended". (Except of course for the guy who wrote the chapter [i think that was T.S. Luikart] or one of the other line developers who **** well know what they intended)

Terentz said:

Is Improved Natural Weapon discussed under the Natural Weapon trait paragraph in DH or somewhere else? I was looking for it when running last night to check something and couldn't find it for some reason. (Given that I was in a hurry in the middle of the game, odds are I looked right at it and somehow blanked and missed it).

What the rules intend and what the people who wrote them intended are two different things. Technically, of course, rules can't "intend" anything either. I read the phrase as anthropormorphic metaphor for "the rules as written."

Improved Natural Weapons is in Creatures Anathema. If I remember correctly, it is simply a trait which makes natural weapons non-primitive.

Hodgepodge said:

I look at intent of the rules the same way I look at intent of any set of rules or laws (i.e. statutory and/or legislative intent). The intent of any written document is what the drafter intended to accomplish with it. When the writing is unambiguous, under the rules of statutory construction, you go with what the writing says. Where the writing is vague looking at the intent of the drafters acts as evidence as to which interpretation is the correct one.

RAW in DH does not address how multipliers stack, players have to deal with the math whatever way makes sense to them. However the Inquisitor's Handbook does address how multipliers stack (in a sidebar, I'll have to look up the page #).

So the question then becomes does one want to run Hammerhand combined w/ unnatural strength based of the standard articulated in the IH; or do you want to say that because Hammerhand is written as strength bonus"times 4" instead of does damage as "x4 Unnatural Strength" that Hammerhand is the exception to normal stacking of multipliers with its own unique massive stacking.

Actually a third ruling (equally plausible from RAW) is that a GM could rule that you get either the Unnatural Strength multiplier or the Hammerhand multiplier and give you just x4 to you base Strength bonus.

As the Hammerhand rules are silent regarding unnatural strength, and the unnatural characteristic rules are silent regarding Hammerhand, the presumption that they stack at all is just that, a presumption.

All three interpretations work with the rules-as-written. Rules as Intended can often be reached by applying the view of "what is most consistent with the rest of the system? While this doesn't always work as there exceptions and special/unique rules twists in most RPGs, generally it works well as most game designers do not seek to create inconsistent systems. However the only way to truely know the intent of the rules you've got to talk to the people who wrote them.

You run into this exact problem (how do multipliers stack) with any creature who possesses both the Daemonic and Unnatural Toughness traits.

As to Improved Natural Weapon, I was glancing through CA as well, but didn't see a section on new traits. I could have missed it especially if it is in a sidebar. I guess I can go back through CA page by page, but if you could point me to the location and save me some time (even a vague "its near this chapter/section" will do if page numbers are not conveniently available) I would greatly appreciate it.

DocIII said:

I'll go with what's written instead of trying to guess what the developers MIGHT have intended. (you can't know for sure unless you ask them). The way I see it, Unnatural Strength is a trait, meaning that it is in constant effect all the time. Hammerhand on the other hand (no pun intended even if it might sound like it ) is a power that requires activation. Once it is succesfully activated it is pretty much forced to take into account any traits or other permanent modifiers that the relevant creature has since they are "stacked" since before the power was activated.

Also it's the most sensible approach. I mean if you have this huge monster with incredible strength (unnatural strength * 2) and this monster is somehow able to conjure up psychic powers as well. Why would the increased strength (which clearly stems from the muscles being powered by the warp) suddenly assume that the monster is weaker than it really is before multiplying it's strength? It makes no sense.

@VT

I prefer to use consistent rules for combining multipliers (which still results in the creature with unnatural strength having the benefit of their trait), rather than assuming that Hammerhand is the unique "let's make everything exponential to a game breaking level" power.

I have no problem if you run it the other way (multipliers x multipliers) if that makes you happy. [At x2x4=x8 its not so bad, but you get into x3x4=x12 and x4x4=x16 you get ridiculous real quick, but hey if that's what you like...]

My only objection to your previous post (other than to state that I use a different interpretation, and why I do so) was your statement that your way was "like the rules intended".

See, the problem with your argument is that while they're all reasonable and contain great, practical, and professionally and academically sound heuristics for deciding betwen interpretations in ambigous cases (which, to take things to extremes, someone like Derrida would argue is actually virtually every case).

The "problem" is that actual rules as written for Hammerhand aren't terribly ambigous if read as literally as possible. They simply state that your Strength Bonus is quadripled. There are quite seperate rules for how mulipliers from Unnatural characteristics stack, but I'm pretty sure (please correct me if I'm wrong) there is no written indication that these should apply to other effects which multiply characteristic bonuses.

At the same time, GMs (and judges and so forth) exist to apply exactly the sort of reasoning which you've explained in cases where an attempt at literal interpretation would lead to deficient results. So you're right, it's just amusing to apply the slightly buggy straightforward reading. Although my Feral World Shaman is arguably legit (and comes with some drawbacks like not being able to maintain many defensive powers).

As it happens, I rather like your feral world shaman idea.

He'd be fun to roleplay- full of twisted, but not (quite) heretical interpretations of the Imperial Creed (not that that will keep him from trouble), dark lore, and unpleasent truths. Being both a Psyker and from Dusk, he was practically born to understand what's at stake and what needs to be done as an Inquisitor. At the same time, routing out heresy may take patience he doesn't have. Possibly a dark horse choice for a hardline Puritan.

DocIII said:

In fact it is not a problem at all as DotDG adress that question. On page 129 in a Rakasya characteristic which include T=62 and both Demonic and Unnatural Toughness traits, you can read:

"Thanks to its Unnatural Toughtness and Demonic traitts, the Rakasya has an effective TB of 24 versus normal attacks and 12 against Holy and Force Weapons and Psychic Damage."

DocIII said:

I've not been able to find this. There is a sidebar referring to Unnatural Characteristics on p 226 but it does not mention how multipliers stack.

DocIII said:

It is in a sidebar on p 4.

EDIT: pp 332-333 of the DH core does refer to how the Unnatural Characteristic modifiers stack.

Terentz said:

Well then that settles it I guess. If Unnatural Toughness and Daemonic stack's accordingly to the rules, then Hammerhand and Unnatural Strength should stack the same way. There's no reason why they shouldn't.