|
|
Post by quenelles84 on Apr 27, 2022 18:48:29 GMT
I want to verify how the Regrowth spell from the Lore of Life works on a Cavalry unit.
The spell says it recovers D3+1 (or D6+1 with Throne of Vines) wounds' worth of models.
It also says that Cavalry count as 2 models.
So if a roll result (either on D3 or D6) that is equal to....
1 = 1+1 = 2 wounds = 1 cavalry model?
2 = 2+1 = 3 wounds = still just 1 cavalry model?
3 = 3+1 = 4 wounds = 2 models?
4 = 4+1 = 5 wounds = still just 2 models?
5 = 5+1 = 6 wounds = 3 models?
6 = 6+1 = 7 wounds = still just 3 models?
Just want to check I've understood that correctly.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Apr 27, 2022 20:39:40 GMT
You have understood that correctly.
Just to cross some i's and dot some t's: an Erratum has changed the original wording to "The target unit instantly recovers D3+1 Wounds' worth of wounds lost earlier in the battle. Each cavalry model recovered in this way counts as 2 Wounds lost earlier in the battle, not 1” (BRB Official Update Version 1.9, p. 5), but that does not affect single wound Cavalry. Note also that, funnily enough, no such Erratum applies to Throne of Vines.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Apr 28, 2022 0:28:19 GMT
You have understood that correctly. Just to cross some i's and dot some t's: an Erratum has changed the original wording to "The target unit instantly recovers D3+1 Wounds' worth of wounds lost earlier in the battle. Each cavalry model recovered in this way counts as 2 Wounds lost earlier in the battle, not 1” (BRB Official Update Version 1.9, p. 5), but that does not affect single wound Cavalry. Note also that, funnily enough, no such Erratum applies to Throne of Vines. I'm feeling sleepy. Does the erratum actually change the spell's effect? Or close a loophole? |
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Apr 28, 2022 7:29:17 GMT
It tried to remove an inconsistency, but opened a new loophole in the process. Before the erratum, models needed to have been slain before they could be resurrected. This actually contradicts the spell description itself on how multi-wound R&F models are to be resurrected. After the erratum, people saw and immediately jumped through the new loophole, ditching the main bulk of the spell, to apply Regrowth on units that do not consist of R&F models (like Steam Tanks, Monsters and whatnot).
|
|
|
|
Post by quenelles84 on Apr 28, 2022 7:57:32 GMT
You have understood that correctly. Just to cross some i's and dot some t's: an Erratum has changed the original wording to "The target unit instantly recovers D3+1 Wounds' worth of wounds lost earlier in the battle. Each cavalry model recovered in this way counts as 2 Wounds lost earlier in the battle, not 1” (BRB Official Update Version 1.9, p. 5), but that does not affect single wound Cavalry. Note also that, funnily enough, no such Erratum applies to Throne of Vines. Thank you very much  |
|
|
|
Post by quenelles84 on Jan 1, 2023 18:01:11 GMT
Follow-up query on this one - where does regrowth stand in terms of 'monstrous cavalry'?
I assume these are still treated as cavalry (i.e. a score of 2 = 1 wound returned to the monstrous cav unit).
Also - do I understand correctly that you can use regrowth to restore a wound to a monster?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jan 1, 2023 22:56:13 GMT
As BRB p. 83 specifies "All the cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry" (with some exceptions, which do not apply here). The second question was already anticipated in my earlier answer: It tried to remove an inconsistency, but opened a new loophole in the process. Before the erratum, models needed to have been slain before they could be resurrected. This actually contradicts the spell description itself on how multi-wound R&F models are to be resurrected. After the erratum, people saw and immediately jumped through the new loophole, ditching the main bulk of the spell, to apply Regrowth on units that do not consist of R&F models (like Steam Tanks, Monsters and whatnot). So, ruleswise still no, but you'll find many people insisting otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by sonofkurnos on Jan 1, 2023 23:28:59 GMT
As BRB p. 83 specifies "All the cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry" (with some exceptions, which do not apply here). The second question was already anticipated in my earlier answer: Is this not in relation to the cavalry rules in this section, rather than any future instance of reference to 'cavalry'? In my mind, for all intents and purpose these two units types could be called anything...the fact one happens to have the name of the other in its own name doesn't mean all such rules apply to both? No? |
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jan 2, 2023 9:44:11 GMT
"Cavalry" and "monstrous cavalry" are fixed terms of the game register, referring to a specific troop type. Since the troop type "monstrous cavalry" is specified as following all the rules for the troop type "cavalry," it does so, unless specifically stated otherwise. Logically, it would not make sense either that the much more powerful monstrous cavalry would be easier to resurrect than normal cavalry.
|
|
