PDA

View Full Version : 'Arboyz Scenarios



IronBrother
17-04-2008, 20:03
I just noticed that the Scenarios for 'Ardboyz are on the US GW website. And I am wondering what other people are thinking about them. They all seem pretty nasty to me, especially the magic one.

Goldenwolf
17-04-2008, 20:23
They seem like a vicious twist for a change :)

Havesome
17-04-2008, 21:08
I am considering a dual Slann list and the magic one has me a little worried. I think I will just roll magic missile type spells that have a casting value of 5 or 6. If my one die comes up 4,5, or 6, I will go ahead with rolling the free one. If it is a 1,2, or 3, I might just let the spell fail. Just too damned risky to go for the big spells.

Famder
17-04-2008, 21:42
I am considering a dual Slann list and the magic one has me a little worried. I think I will just roll magic missile type spells that have a casting value of 5 or 6. If my one die comes up 4,5, or 6, I will go ahead with rolling the free one. If it is a 1,2, or 3, I might just let the spell fail. Just too damned risky to go for the big spells.
Why? So long as you are 4th gen or higher you ignore the miscast table.

Havesome
17-04-2008, 21:55
Wouldn't the scenario rules over-rule the Slann miscast rule? This scenario also makes Teclis much less powerful, too.

Goldenwolf
17-04-2008, 22:41
I think that scenario was put in to keep VC, Lizzies, HE, and Tzeentch in check.

Famder
17-04-2008, 22:43
Wouldn't the scenario rules over-rule the Slann miscast rule? This scenario also makes Teclis much less powerful, too.
The Slaan special rule says they don't roll on the table not that they don't miscast. The spell still fails, they just don't have to suffer any ill effects. There is nothing in the scenario that contradicts this.

dvdhwk
17-04-2008, 22:55
In the first scenario, it says: "In addition any spell casting roll
that contains a double 4, 5, or 6 will be cast with Irresistible Force."

But then it says: "Note: A casting roll still
has to achieve the minimum result to successfully cast."

Irresistible force is defined on p. 107 of the BRB as 1) automatically being cast, and 2) being ineligible for dispel attempts.

Were they intending then to have the "4-4" and the "5-5" rolls to only have the 2nd effect and not the first effect of Irresistible Force, that is to only be ineligible for dispel attempts?

If yes, then does the scenario rule override the normal rules for a "6-6" roll as well, and not make the spell succeed automatically?

Famder
17-04-2008, 23:07
Nowhere in the Irresistable Force section does it say the spell is automatically cast. It only specifies that it cannot be dispelled.

Yes to your first question. Example, a 12+ spell that rolls 4-4 still needs an addition 4 or more to be successfully cast.

To answer your second question, nothing has changed with double 6's, you still need to meet or beat the casting value, but if you do then it is impossible to dispel.

Double 6's only automatically do something in the dispel portion of the magic phase not the casting portion.

dvdhwk
17-04-2008, 23:19
Nowhere in the Irresistable Force section does it say the spell is automatically cast. It only specifies that it cannot be dispelled.

Sorry, that's wrong. Here's the rule from p.107 that I referenced:


When rolling to cast a spell, any result of two or more unmodified 6s means that the spell has been cast with irresistible force. The spell is cast successfully and the enemy cannot attempt to stop it working by dispelling it, as described below. It cannot be resisted!
(Emphasis mine)

Consequently, your analysis of the second issue relies on a faulty presupposition.

Famder
17-04-2008, 23:51
I don't know how I completely missed that clause. I read it before I posted and must have glossed over it by accident. The answer to your second question is therefore that the rule is left unchanged and double 6's are auto-cast. There are very few spells that don't meet their casting value with double 6's anyway, but I would assume that the Note is only for the 4, and 5 irresistables.