|
Post by mottdon on Sept 7, 2017 16:13:19 GMT
So I want to pose a question and possibly a discussion about this item.
In the AB it states, "One use only." Does this mean that he only gets to use the ring once in the game to cast his spell, or that he only gets to generate a spell at the beginning of the game, instead of generating a spell at the beginning of each player's turns?
Also, another question I had about it was where the rule says, "At the beginning of the game, choose one of the 8 lores...and generate a spell from it as if the bearer were a Level 1 Wizard." Now, being an Enchanted Item, if a Level 4 Wizard were to take this item, could he still add his +4 to cast this bound spell? Or is it limited to +1?
Please also feel free to discuss the usefulness of this item. It seems VERY useful to me if a Lv4 can take it, essentially giving him an extra spell. Love taking Lore of Life, but need a touch of extra offence? Take the ring and opt for Fireball from the Lore of Fire! All for just 30 points! I just haven't seen it taken all that much. Has anybody else seen it played much?
|
|
|
Post by Naitsabes on Sept 7, 2017 16:47:36 GMT
A veritable Easter egg hunt!
You only get to cast that spell once.
This is a bound item. so, you don't get to add wizard levels (but a non-wizard can use it). You GENERATE a spell as if you were a Lv1 wizard. You don't CAST it like a wizard.
So, the ring is not very useful. The only cool thing I see is that you get to chose the lore at the beginning of the game. so, if you were one of the lucky ones gaming in a pocket of happiness with crowds of people gathering for pick-up games and so you don't know what army you play when you make your list...then and only then that ring would allow you to adapt to your opponent a tiny bit. Yes, I am grasping for straws here. (I guess if you are doing an all-comers list the ring also helps)
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Sept 7, 2017 16:52:34 GMT
Okay, I see that now. I suppose it's about as useful as the Luminark's or Hurricanum''s bound spell. I think it'd be better if you could cast it more than once though. Just take the Ruby Ring of Ruin I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Sept 7, 2017 17:04:55 GMT
What Naitsabes says.
"One use only" means...well...one use only.
BRB p. 37: "Note that bound spells never benefit from any casting modifiers that the user might have (for Wizard level, magic items, and so forth."
The Ring of Volans is only useful, if you can manage to get a powerful spell. For that you would need enough Wizards with the same Lore to control the spell selection. The fact that it is a "One use only" item does mean you can six-dice it without fear of IF, because "If the bound spell is contained within a magic item of some kind, the item crumbles to dust and cannot be used again during the game. Do not roll on the Miscast table" (ibidem). On a Witch Hunter, it would also benefit from the KB rule.
Alternatively, you could use the Ring to increase the chances of getting the right spell on the right Wizard.
However, I feel it is not worth the points, and I have never taken it.
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Sept 7, 2017 18:21:14 GMT
What if it were not a "One use only" item? Would that make it worth it? (I'm trying to gauge it's credibility.) I tend to think it would.
I could see it working with something like the Lore of Shadow though. Roll for your spell. If you roll a spell you really don't want on your Lv4, then keep it there, if you roll, say, Pit of Shades, and want that on your Lv4, then swap it out for Miasma. Then take Miasma on your Lv4 as well. Start spamming Miasma everywhere. Or do that with Lore of Beasts. Could be handy. That "One use only" thing still sucks, but how often in a game are you really going to need to cast multiple Miasmas or Wildforms?
|
|
|
Post by Naitsabes on Sept 7, 2017 20:34:09 GMT
you could compare it straight to the ruby ring of fire (or whatever it's called). that one is marginally useful, more so if you jump with both feet through that rules loophole and claim killing blow from the witch hunter.
Here is a cute idea: what if you are forced to generate a new spell after you used it (maybe even be forced to change the lore)? wacky and random. This is not the Ninth Age after all.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Sept 7, 2017 20:38:40 GMT
If it was not one use only, then, self-evidently, it would be worth 30 points - more in fact.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Sept 7, 2017 22:21:46 GMT
if you jump with both feet through that rules loophole and claim killing blow from the witch hunter. As I have pointed out before, it is not a loophole. Anything that is expressis verbis allowed simply cannot be a loophole. Empire AB Official Update Version 1.2, p.2: Q: If a Witch Hunter is equipped with a magic item such as the Ring of Volans or the Ruby Ring of Ruin, will any bound spell effects/magic missiles retain the Killing Blow special rule against the target of the Witch Hunter’s Accusation rule? (p37) A: Yes. That said, if it had been up to me, I would not have made that ruling.
|
|
|
Post by Naitsabes on Sept 8, 2017 3:26:36 GMT
I purposefully stay away from discussions where rule books get quoted, the meanings of commas or word definitions from the dictionary get discussed. Enough of that in my work life (but no, I am thankfully not a lawyer). There is a simple test "What would mama say". I asked my mama if the same magic ring should have different effects when used by one guy versus the other. She said no. Hence it is a loophole to me.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Sept 8, 2017 13:13:13 GMT
I started quoting the rules, when I noticed that what I thought or remembered the rule to be was wrong. In fact, immediately quoting the actual rule significantly decreases in most cases the length of a thread, as it eliminates posts with unsupported variations of "yes, it does/no, it does not," until somebody quotes the rule anyway. Generally, I also try to point out the underlying principle of the rule, so that people can understand where the answer is coming from.
|
|
|
Post by frozenfood on Sept 8, 2017 14:38:09 GMT
Ring could useful for metal or death. Against another steamtank metal would be fun and a death snipe always comes in handy
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Sept 8, 2017 15:06:41 GMT
I started quoting the rules, when I noticed that what I thought or remembered the rule to be was wrong. In fact, immediately quoting the actual rule significantly decreases in most cases the length of a thread, as it eliminates posts with unsupported variations of "yes, it does/no, it does not," until somebody quotes the rule anyway. Generally, I also try to point out the underlying principle of the rule, so that people can understand where the answer is coming from. I think someone that can do this is needed in any discussion groups such as this. I know I get rules wrong all the time. I usually am just trying to spark conversation and keep things flowing (I've noticed a lot of the time people won't comment on a post until others have started commenting as well), but occasionally there are things I just get wrong. I need to be corrected in those occasions. (I also do this intentionally sometimes as well, because nothing spurs someone to speak up like when they have someone "dead-to-rights" regarding rules.) Frequently a rule doesn't come up very often or doesn't follow a logical conclusion, so a clearly defined explanation needs to be laid out. The interpretation of these rules may spark debate but at the very least, it should bring a resolution one way or another. You either believe X method or Y method. Not much grey area there. I'm sure most of you guys think I must me a complete moron regarding the rules, but there is usually an underlying purpose why I say some things. Take this topic, for example. I don't really care about the Ring of Volans, and had a pretty good idea regarding the rules, but I wanted to spark conversation on the subject and eventually want to have a topic started on each Empire item, unit, etc. in this tactics section. That way, if someone has a question regarding the item, there is a thread that may already have the answer, or tactic. If not, they have an established place where to pose their theory/question. Plus, through discussions like this, someone may have a revelation that otherwise, never would have come to them.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Sept 8, 2017 16:47:33 GMT
Well, one thing that has not come up here yet is the Lore attribute. Lifebloom is generally the most useful; Kindleflame and Wildheart completely useless; while the usefullnes of the others is dependent on the spell, the situation, and the difference between Wizard & caster, which the RoV rules do not address.
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Sept 8, 2017 18:19:35 GMT
That's very true! If you were to take something as simple as Earthblood, then Lifebloom is a good boon for that. If you were to take the Ring with Miasma from Shadows on say, your BSB, that could be really nice if you have another killy or super-defensive Captain waiting in another unit. Smoke and Mirrors them out, keeping your BSB safe and suddenly giving your opponent a real headache.
As you say, Fire and Beasts Attribute suck. Light, Metal and Heavens are all situation dependent. Death, Shadow and Life can be good. IMHO.
I think that if you were to try something like the Ring of Volans, you'd probably be wise to spam quite a few Bound Spells and low casting spells, like the Hurricanum, Luminark and/or War Altar's bound spells, Ruby Ring of Ruin, and Warrior Priest spells. Keep throwing out lots of dice and something is bound to get through.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Sept 8, 2017 22:30:23 GMT
There is a problem I hinted at in my previous post: the difference between Wizard and caster, a problem that, as far as I know, only really arises with the Ring of Volans. The BRB (p. 37) is quite clear: "Possessing a bound spell does not make a character a Wizard — he just has an item that can cast a spell." That distinction is maintained elsewhere too. Some spells (e.g. Transformation of Kadon) and Lore attributes (Shadow, Death) specify that they apply to Wizards. If the carrier of the ring is not a Wizard, then RAW he is not able to use or benefit from them. This would have warranted an FAQ, which, of course, will not be forthcoming. Therefore, it is best to discuss this beforehand with your opponent - which, however, may also rob you of the element of surprise.
|
|