|
Post by thegoat on May 18, 2022 12:33:49 GMT
Yes the wizard and the unit containing the Banner of Avelorn which he joined Voltron together into a new unit that also contains the Banner of Avelorn. If that Voltron unit is targeted by a spell Banner of Avelorn is triggered. But if the wizard is targeted by himself (even while he is inside the unit) Banner of Avelorn doesn't trigger. The wizard being a part of the Voltron unit, doesn't stop him from also being a character and a wizard. If a spell targets him because he is a character or a wizard, it doesn't count as targeting the Voltron unit. This is my only point of discussion. You are dissasociating the wizard from the unit. All I am asking is for evidence of a rule which does that. And yet, so far, none has been provided. Okay I agree. While the wizard is in the unit, spells can only target the entire Voltron unit together. The wizard cannot be targeted individually. Unfortunately the Voltron unit is not a valid target for Throne of Vines. So the spell cannot be cast.
|
|
|
Post by johngg on May 18, 2022 12:52:14 GMT
This is how I see the interaction working;
Therefore, the affects of a magic banner carried by the unit will affect the entire unit.
Therefore if a spell from the Lore of Light / Life targets the unit, see above, the wizard casting the spell will benefit from +4 to cast.
The terms 'target' and 'unit' being used interchangably.
The affect of this spell will specificially affect a 'Wizard' so while the spell will target the relevant 'unit', see MAGIC-CHOSING A TARGET & COMBINED UNITS above, only the wizard will be affected.
Therefore, the Wizard is benefitting from the banner when casting the spell, therefore there is no reason for the rules of the banner NOT to take effect.
That's where I'm coming from. I'm very happy to be proved wrong as lets face it, High Elves need no buffing!
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on May 18, 2022 12:56:27 GMT
Nope. The combined unit is not a valid target.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2022 13:10:30 GMT
Related question: If a character is specifically targeted by a shooting attack (e.g. using the Sniper special rule) would he benefit from the Blasted Standard (WoC army book) if he was in a unit carrying it?
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on May 18, 2022 14:28:30 GMT
@pgamopi : Yes, because the character is still part of the unit, and the Blasted Standard is not dependent on who is being targeted. Here the combined unit rule does come into play. WOC AB, p. 63: "Each time the bearer, or his unit, suffer a hit from a shooting attack, roll a D6 immediately before rolling To Wound." As I have pointed out before, this is a targeting issue. If it had said: "Each time the bearer, or his unit, is targeted" that would be a different matter. Of course, as I also pointed out before, johngg 's theory is proven wrong by the description of the BoA itself: "Spells from the Lore of Light and the Lore of Life cast by a friendly Wizard that target a unit containing the Banner of Avelorn receive a +4 bonus to cast." The BoA does not affect the unit or any models in it: it affects spells that target the unit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2022 15:29:46 GMT
@pgamopi : Yes, because the character is still part of the unit, and the Blasted Standard is not dependent on who is being targeted. Here the combined unit rule does come into play. WOC AB, p. 63: "Each time the bearer, or his unit, suffer a hit from a shooting attack, roll a D6 immediately before rolling To Wound." As I have pointed out before, this is a targeting issue. If it had said: "Each time the bearer, or his unit, is targeted" that would be a different matter. Of course, as I also pointed out before, johngg 's theory is proven wrong by the the description of the BoA description itself: "Spells from the Lore of Light and the Lore of Life cast by a friendly Wizard that target a unit containing the Banner of Avelorn receive a +4 bonus to cast." The BoA does not affect the unit or any models in it: it affects spells that target the unit. Great, thanks. Makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by johngg on May 18, 2022 18:57:05 GMT
Nope. The combined unit is not a valid target. None are so blind as those that won't see.
|
|
|
Post by johngg on May 18, 2022 19:00:38 GMT
Your ad hominem arguments are pointless. Find fault with my statements as presented above or conceed the point. You have failed to outline how the outcome presented does not work, and I have stated how it does. I say again, Find fault with my statements as presented above or conceed the point.
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on May 18, 2022 19:50:30 GMT
Please show us the rule that allows a spell that is restricted to only target the single wizard casting it to instead target the unit the wizard joined?
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on May 18, 2022 20:40:29 GMT
Your ad hominem arguments are pointless. Find fault with my statements as presented above or conceed the point. You have failed to outline how the outcome presented does not work, and I have stated how it does. I say again, Find fault with my statements as presented above or conceed the point. Since you did not show my actual post, here it is: @pgamopi : Yes, because the character is still part of the unit, and the Blasted Standard is not dependent on who is being targeted. Here the combined unit rule does come into play. WOC AB, p. 63: "Each time the bearer, or his unit, suffer a hit from a shooting attack, roll a D6 immediately before rolling To Wound." As I have pointed out before, this is a targeting issue. If it had said: "Each time the bearer, or his unit, is targeted" that would be a different matter. Of course, as I also pointed out before, johngg 's theory is proven wrong by the description of the BoA itself: "Spells from the Lore of Light and the Lore of Life cast by a friendly Wizard that target a unit containing the Banner of Avelorn receive a +4 bonus to cast." The BoA does not affect the unit or any models in it: it affects spells that target the unit. So, please show us where the ad hominem arguments are supposed to be? I must say, this seems rather indicative or your whole line of reasoning. You may well think this is another " ad hominem attack," but I suggest you would benefit from a course in formal logic. Not that I am optimistic you will take one, because even if your statements were proven wrong x-number of ways, you would not, or (what would be worse) could not recognise that was the case.
|
|
|
Post by johngg on May 19, 2022 11:11:45 GMT
yep, I think this thread is done.
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on May 19, 2022 11:31:48 GMT
yep, I think this thread is done. That we agree on.
|
|