|
|
Post by sedge on Oct 27, 2018 18:08:56 GMT
So having been on the receiving end of another few rounds of painful Skaven magic, I want to make sure we're playing it correctly. BRB page 31 gives the following general targeting restrictions for spells "unless stated otherwise": - Target must be in Wizard's forward arc
- Wizard doesn't need line of sight to target
- Target must be within spell's range
- Target cannot be engaged in close combat
It then goes on to talk about spell types that "enforce additional restrictions or waive others", and that spells from older Army Books will "contain any casting restrictions that apply".
So does that mean that spells from the old army books (i.e. Skaven in this case) ignore the general targeting restrictions too, or that the four listed above will always apply?
And secondly, if we assume the general restrictions do apply, then how does that work with these two spells:
- Scorch says "place the small round template anywhere within 24"" - does that "anywhere" override the targeting restrictions (forward arc, not engaged in close combat)?
- Cracks Call - you draw a straight line "in any direction" within the caster's arc of sight (forward arc) - can this be targeted at units in close combat?
We've been playing without those restrictions, and I'm not sure that's correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Oct 27, 2018 18:43:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sedge on Oct 27, 2018 19:45:28 GMT
Ah, thanks. So that clears that one up... as in it's not clear at all, so you have to decide yourself how to interpret it that unclear bit of text in the BRB. Damned rats.
I still have a question mark over Scorch, though - because even if you do apply the general restrictions to it, the "place anywhere" line could be considered to be "stating otherwise".
|
|
|
|
Post by vulcan on Oct 27, 2018 22:27:26 GMT
Since the Skaven book was written for 7E, and was only marginally updated for 8E (and spells were not big on the priority even there), Skaven magic does not work like other lores. By the BRB, since Skaven spells are not specifically categorized (as Augment, Hex, Direct Damage, or Magic Missile) none of them are bound by the rules for those categories. Instead, Skaven magic is bound only by the rules written into each spell... even if they do mimic a spell category disturbingly well.
|
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 28, 2018 8:56:03 GMT
As discussed in the thread knoffles linked, it is true that Skaven spells are not bound by limitations of spell types. However, reading the relevant rules in their context indicate that the general rules regarding spell restrictions still remain applicable. |
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 28, 2018 12:18:35 GMT
Regarding Scorch: the "anywhere" in the spell description as such does not override the general restrictions, just as it does not in the case of Flame Storm or Pit of Shades.
|
|
|
|
Post by sedge on Oct 28, 2018 13:06:37 GMT
Thanks for the helpful responses, as always.
|
|
|
|
Post by vulcan on Oct 28, 2018 23:56:56 GMT
If only GW had bothered to categorize Skaven spells in the FAQ, it would have solved a lot of problems...
|
|
|
|
Post by DiscoQing on Oct 29, 2018 8:41:07 GMT
I would personally categorise them with my opponent before the game. That would make it easier for the both of you  . As both of these spells are templates, I would use the Direct Damage restrictions. |
|
|
|
Post by sedge on Oct 29, 2018 13:14:42 GMT
Yeah, that's what we were thinking for those two. However, he's thinking the Dreaded 13th should be a Hex (so no forward arc/not in combat requirements) whereas I feel it should be Direct Damage. I get that some similar spells (e.g. Curse of Years) are Hexes, but most of the "insta-kill" type spells such as Final Transmutation are Direct Damage. Plus the Dreaded 13th is ridiculous enough without having it thrown around even more  |
|
|
|
Post by DiscoQing on Oct 29, 2018 14:26:03 GMT
13th should deffo be direct damage!
I get that the spell performs as a "hex", using meaning of the word, (like a curse - as opposed to a damaging spell...).
But having that cast whilst your in combat, lol!
Imagine dwellers did the same, so should be treated as such (imo) hehe
|
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 29, 2018 16:34:20 GMT
If anything, 13th should be a DD spell. One should not read too much in the use of the word "curse." For instance, the Lore of the Vampires Lore Attribute Curse of Undeath is anything but a hex.
Anyway, if you cannot agree, you have to fall back on the default position, in which case the 13th is subject to the general restrictions AND will need LoS.
|
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 29, 2018 22:13:04 GMT
To add: Hex seems to be in the eye of the beholder. I originally thought that there was a more substantial difference between hex and DD spells, but it seems that is not necessarily the case (compare the hex Curse of Years with the DD spell Fiery Convocation). It may be simply down to which restrictions the author wanted to apply to the spell or not. If you do want to deviate from the default position, I think it is fair to look in the case of a 7th edition spell at the 7th edition restrictions on that spell.
1. In the 7th edition BRB p. 107, it is specified that "Wizards cannot cast spells at units engaged in close combat, unless the spell only affects the caster himself or the spell's description specifies otherwise" - which is not the case here.
2. The Curse of the Horned Rat needs LoS. In the 7th edition, the forward arc was the arc of sight: you could not draw LoS outside the forward arc [unless specified otherwise, of course. which, again is not the case here].
Clearly, those restrictions are at odds with defining the Dreaded 13th as an 8th edition hex.
|
|
.