PDA

View Full Version : What about with ensorcelled weapon?



Jbasciani
17-12-2008, 15:07
I read some week ago about this case, but the aswers is unclear yet, if anyone know how it work please i wanna know... thank:)

logan054
17-12-2008, 15:45
its basically a magical weapons that grants +1 strength

Condottiere
17-12-2008, 15:54
Or is it treated as a magic weapon that grants +1S?

logan054
17-12-2008, 16:22
same difference

Neckutter
17-12-2008, 18:57
appearanltly there is no such thing as a "magical" weapon in fantasy. treat them as magic weapons that give +1S like the sword of might.

Jbasciani
18-12-2008, 00:12
sorry, i wasn´t clear, i`m talking about the lance, what happen if i upgrade the knight with lance, they still count as magical weapon and 1str

logan054
18-12-2008, 00:29
why would it, how is it any different from buying a halberd for you chaos warriors? in order to use the lance it has to replace the enscrolled weapon otherwise you could never use the lance, the lance and enscrolled weapon do not combine either.

Lord Malorne
18-12-2008, 00:35
The confusion is you pay 5pts for a rarely good additional strength only on the charge, also the description used is 'upgrade' after that I am sorted so use it as magic +1 S with lance rule.

Why pay 5pts to get crapper?

Horus38
18-12-2008, 00:45
sorry, i wasn´t clear, i`m talking about the lance, what happen if i upgrade the knight with lance, they still count as magical weapon and 1str

No, it says "Upgrade ensorcelled weapons to lances...... 5points/model". According to this wording the lances are not ensorcelled and will only count as normal lances. As others have said a rather lame upgrade to have to pay for.

Jbasciani
18-12-2008, 01:42
well, my point is. if i must pay 40 point for a model with some caracteristic that include a magical weapon that add 1S, and i wanna "upgrade" i must pay 5 pt plus and lost their good caracteristic i`m already pay? that don`t have sence

Nurgling Chieftain
18-12-2008, 01:52
I wish people wouldn't argue what the rules are based on their opinion of the game balance. You know what? Some upgrades just aren't worth taking. It's always been that way.

Jbasciani
18-12-2008, 02:17
ok nurgling chieftain, in a first place i`m just wanna know how the rules work, in second place if i wanna say my opinion is not up to you, you know why? why i can expose my opinion about a rules or whatever thing about this games? is not the way that it going better with the opinion of the gamers?

Nurgling Chieftain
18-12-2008, 03:05
...in a first place i`m just wanna know how the rules work...No, you made an argument that a certain rule should work a certain way. That invites counter-arguments. My counter-argument is that your entire style of argumentation - that you don't think the lance is worth the price - is not a valid argument about what the rules are at all. Now, if we were discussing the generation of house rules, that would be a different matter.


...in second place if i wanna say my opinion is not up to you...And the corollary to that is that if I want to say my opinion of your opinions, that's not up to you.

Horus38
18-12-2008, 03:21
well, my point is. if i must pay 40 point for a model with some caracteristic that include a magical weapon that add 1S, and i wanna "upgrade" i must pay 5 pt plus and lost their good caracteristic i`m already pay? that don`t have sence

Well you're upgrading your knights to get S6 on the charge. Some people might think that's useful, which is perfectly fine if they're willing to pay 5 points for it.

Nurgling Chieftain is pointing out that the upgrade isn't considered useful by the majority of players. This doesn't mean the rule/upgrade was written incorrectly, just that it's a "bad" upgrade. No one is challenging your ability to express your opinion Jbasciani, so don't take it that way.

Condottiere
18-12-2008, 03:32
It's a good upgrade depending on circumstances, which admittedly would be few and of limited duration. Personally, I'd stick with the ensorcelled blade and use those 5 points for something else.

Neckutter
18-12-2008, 05:59
well, my point is. if i must pay 40 point for a model with some caracteristic that include a magical weapon that add 1S, and i wanna "upgrade" i must pay 5 pt plus and lost their good caracteristic i`m already pay? that don`t have sence

its GW, get used to it. of course it doesnt make sense. you pay 5 points for non-magical lances. its dumb, so dont do it. S5 all the time is better anyways.

@nurglechieftan woke up on the wrong side of the BRB?

AMWOOD co
18-12-2008, 09:09
I've been waiting ever since Hordes of Chaos came out to get my lances back, even if it meant having S4 on profile.

Personally, I think it's well worth the 5 points. I tend to be the one doing the charging with my Chaos Knights, anything with T4 or an armour better than 5+ is going to feel the extra stength of my lances, and I've rarely had battles last more than one round against my knights. Now this is rarely and not never, but usually it was against a dogged enemy (see lucky break test or stubborn) or an unbreakable foe. Unbreakables don't usually last the next round (too many die in the first round) and dogged foes have now lost much of their resolution and will continue to lose.

My knights have lost a few fights, but these are usually against enemies that would be tough in the first place (like Karl Franz on a horse in a unit of his knights).

Finally, what great advantage do ensorcelled weapons give? Ethereal foes? Take a banner, you outnumber them in all likelyhood and that 1+ save is going to be useful too. Beat them in resolution. Forest Spirits? They still have to punch through all that armour to hurt you and now you've sacrificed extra strength on the charge for their lack of ward save. The results: Dryads, ensorcelled is better barely; Treekin, Lance beats out ensorcelled barely; Treeman (assuming 3+ armour, I can't remember) they are even at 2/9 odds of a hit scoring a wound. Magic items? The number of items that are ignored by magical attacks are very few and are rarely taken by the fear of facing Daemons or characters with magic weapons.

Not charging? This is the real issue. +1 S all the time or +2 S when charging? Personally? I want lances for my Lord of Chaos once again. When can I get that back?

Is it worth 5 pts? To deal with those nasty Dwarfs and Saurus that I'll be facing, I'll say yes.

Whitehorn
18-12-2008, 10:20
The answer was answered.

Lances are not ensorcelled. You pay 5 points to drop the weapons and get lances instead.

On paper it looks bad, but test it out. S6 is a pivotal number, as hinted above.

Ensorcelled weapons vs T4 needs 3s to wound, so the lance is better here, needing 2s. Lances are also 1 more armour reduction. I mention T4 because it's a very common value. Dwarves, Orcs, Chaos Warriors, Knights.

Sure, you only get to use them on the charge, but your knights *should* be charging, else they're most likely dead regardless of what weapon they have.

It comes down to something simple. It's a choice. It IS viable, but not necessarily better. You don't have to take it if you believe the upgrade is worse. In many ways it is.

Neckutter
18-12-2008, 12:38
I want lances for my Lord of Chaos once again. When can I get that back?


mounted chaos lords eschew the pointy sticks of chaos knights in favor of the almighty halberd!

The Red Scourge
18-12-2008, 13:08
mounted chaos lords eschew the pointy sticks of chaos knights in favor of the almighty halberd!

Dumb lords of the dark ages choose the halberd.

Todays cunning lord of darkness knows the value of S7 and choose either a flail or a magic weapon – what is true for knights is doubly true for heroes, you don't want them in ongoing combat, let them break a unit and then move on to the next soft and squishy target :evilgrin:

lparigi34
18-12-2008, 14:28
Uhmm, interesting, I just wrote like 4 full paragraphs and decided to delete them as all of the sudden all stopped to make sense...

I was in favor of the "upgrade" notion, but granting +3S on the charge, +1S all of the time and magical,,, WoW!, seems nasty...

What is the price of giving lances to something that already is S5 and have magical attacks?... With the only withdraw that magical weapons can be nullified by items, but not that relevant to this point.

I think 5 points is OK... but that maybe just me. In most cases, having such high strength is only of limited use, as it only kicks in in some cases (high T or AS stuff), and might be nice to auto destroy chariots.

Bring in your Ensorcelled Lances, more points to make for my chuckas or fanatics...

Jbasciani
18-12-2008, 15:14
jajajaja good point lparigi34, those fanatic are really nasty at all.....

nosferatu1001
18-12-2008, 15:20
Simple - you upgrade ensorcelled weapons to lances.

Now, does it say they are ensorcelled lances? Anywhere? No. Then they are just plain lances.

Any other reading is wishful thinking.

Rooze
18-12-2008, 19:46
Simple - you upgrade ensorcelled weapons to lances.

Now, does it say they are ensorcelled lances? Anywhere? No. Then they are just plain lances.

Any other reading is wishful thinking.

Exactly! En whether this is or is not an 'upgrade' for the BETTER, it entirely up to you, and rather a discussion of preferences than one of RULES!

But I agree though: GW should learn to use langage like let's say Magic The Gathering, and be consistent about wording, keywords, etc.

Geddonight
18-12-2008, 21:17
Well, I understand the confusion, though.

Throughout the army books I have read (limited # as I'm new blood to WHFB), "Upgrade" is used to denote a better version of the specific unit of measure in question.

For instance, you can upgrade a Dark Elf Warrior to be a musician, standard bearer, or lordling. All of these are better versions of the original unit--a dark elf warrior. They don't stop being dark elf warriors just because the Lordling has an extra attack, or because the standard bearer carries a flag. They all still have eternal hatred.

It's not illogical to draw the conclusion that these lances also benefit from being ensorcelled because they are upgraded from ensorcelled weapons. To be absolutely clear, GW should have written "swap" or "replace" (as they do in other army books for similar situations) if they truly wanted lances to be regular.

As it stands, there's a little bit of grey area. I could still be swayed either way.

Lord Malorne
18-12-2008, 21:19
Or exchange.

Very odd and not as clear as many on here beleive, until it is FAQ'd it comes under your local areas ruling.

lparigi34
18-12-2008, 21:31
If I upgrade my old 4.0 Ford to be a Nascar racing car, it is still a Ford... Now.

When I purchase Upgrades for my PC guarantee, It is something extra to my current guarantee...

Is that all wishful thinking?... flawed logics... and being able to say "wishful thinking" to defend your point does not add up much to this discussion but rather makes it sour.

The OP was just making a question, a valid one, for three reasons.

1.- If it were a clear cut case, there would be no discussion about it.

2.- As I explained in my previous post, the treatment is different in other armies, so it seems that paying the points for this swap, even preserving the "ensorcelled" part, maybe not that wise.

3.- In the text say "Upgrade", lookup for the dictionary for its meaning if necessary, I did. Also GW convention (and correct English, BTW) is that changing things for another that is totally different is expressed by the words "swap" or "exchange".

So IMHO, there are Ensorcelled Lances, those give magical attacks, with +2S (or maybe +3S) on the charge and +1S the rest of the time.

I jump off the boat, this must be FAQ'd

kramplarv
18-12-2008, 22:17
But that argument is not useful here since the the rules states that everything that exists are as written.

IE; a Lance is a Lance is a Lance. No matter if the enscrolled weapon was before.
In the same way as a horse is a horse. A hellsteed is a hellsted.

Unless the upgrade gives the Knights enscrolled lances as a rule, they do not have enscrolled lances. No matter wording.

nosferatu1001
18-12-2008, 22:21
Does it say "Ensorcelled Lance"? What, no? then they aren't ensorcelled lances.

It states they are lances - regardless of what you might say about "upgrade", it still states they are lances and therfore they only follow the rules for lances.

How this can be misread I don't know....

Lord Malorne
18-12-2008, 22:33
Because like most people I read sentences from left to right...

Necromancy Black
18-12-2008, 22:41
When I purchase Upgrades for my PC guarantee, It is something extra to my current guarantee...

I've seen people upgrade to bad warrenties and too Mac's before.

Where is your logic now?!?!

But seriously, it doesn't matter what you doing with the Enscrolled weapons, be it upgrading, exchanging, swapping, improving, enhancing you sex life...in the end it's all for a simple, mundane Lance.

Maybe the FAQ will say otherwsie. But till then the RAW is that they're mundane Lances.

Jbasciani
19-12-2008, 02:30
Please correct me if make a mistake, in the descripcion of the ensorcelled weapons said "Regarless of their form or the hexes inscribed upon them. they are all enchanted in order to kill." so if they can upgrade to lance, this lance is a ensorcelled weapon too...

Neckutter
19-12-2008, 03:13
@jb i play WoC. they are regular lances, bro.
your solution? stop fighting the rule, and dont buy lances.
S5 magical attacks all the time is better anyways.

Griefbringer
19-12-2008, 05:30
Please correct me if make a mistake, in the descripcion of the ensorcelled weapons said "Regarless of their form or the hexes inscribed upon them. they are all enchanted in order to kill."

And rules-wise, this does not say a whole lot.

Though you could claim that it allows you to model your knights with axes, swords, maces, bludgeons, hammers, clubs, scythes, daggers, baseball bats, turnips, two-handed battle carrots, very sharp slices of mango, pointy sticks, spiky gloves, nuclear missiles and angry hedgehogs, and these all would count as ensorcelled weapons.

Necromancy Black
19-12-2008, 05:50
And rules-wise, this does not say a whole lot.

Though you could claim that it allows you to model your knights with axes, swords, maces, bludgeons, hammers, clubs, scythes, daggers, baseball bats, turnips, two-handed battle carrots, very sharp slices of mango, pointy sticks, spiky gloves, nuclear missiles and angry hedgehogs, and these all would count as ensorcelled weapons.

Please to not temp me to but and paint up several Chaos Knights armed to the teeth with fruit.

Actually...that would go well in a Monty Python based army....

Damocles8
19-12-2008, 05:58
um if I may interject.....+5 points for a standard lance is normal....we are talking about a +25 point S7 charging lance???? that almost seems fair.....

Condottiere
19-12-2008, 07:31
Where does the carrot imagery come from?

You either have S5 magic weapons all the time or S6 mundane lance for 5 points extra. Don't charge banshees and concentrate on destroying Great Swords.

Rooze
19-12-2008, 08:58
Please correct me if make a mistake, in the descripcion of the ensorcelled weapons said "Regarless of their form or the hexes inscribed upon them. they are all enchanted in order to kill." so if they can upgrade to lance, this lance is a ensorcelled weapon too...

In this wording, I could EVEN model LANCES on the knights, NOT pay the +5 points for lances, and they would stil count as Ensorcelled Weapons (but still are not lances though!)?!? This is a twisted way of thinking!
One must make a clear distinction in explanation of items/rules of what is descriptive text, and what is rule. Should we regard EVERYTHING RAW, and muse and tinker and discuss and plot and scheme over every little bit of grammar to twist the game then?

Oh and by the way: the description speaks only of the ensorcelled weapons, and not of the lances anyway, so there's still no definitive answer in that!

nosferatu1001
19-12-2008, 13:35
Lord Malorned - As I said - regardless of the word used preceding "ensorcelled weapons to lances", the actual WEAPON is a lance. They could have used swap, change, buy, replace, etc, and they would still be normal lances.

It does not say ensorcelled lance, therefore it isn't. It does say lance, so it is a lance. Without anything specifc (such as, I don't know, "ensorcelled lance") then it is NOT an ensorcelled weapon.

Again - you are misreading the rule and ignoring the fact the weapon you are buying is a lance. Nothing more, nothing less, jsut a lance.

lparigi34
19-12-2008, 14:17
At least there´s only two side to this discussion...

Side A: going RAW, you exchange the EW for the Lance. Period. (That of course meaning that the word upgrade does not mean such a thing :wtf:)

Side B: paying attention to the meaning of the words, left to right and accepting the "upgrade" meaning to be improvement over something.

Then I can see 2 B sides possible interpretations also.

B1: The Lance adds +3S on the charge and +1S the rest of the time, all magical.

B2: The Lance adds +2S on the charge and +1S the rest of the time, all magical.

I must add that by comparing to other armies books, points wise, either of the B choices seems the most acceptable.

This is so far, all I can add. Now lets leave opened all possibilities, just for the intent of doing it.

---------------------------------------------------

Having we already made a conundrum on this, lets blame GW for, as usual, not being able to delve further when they make some rules and leaving things open to interpretation.

Now, despite my clear preference on how it should be applied, I really want to make clear I DO NOT PLAY WoC, and indeed I play against them, so B interpretation will clearly not help me, and so I must be defending the A side.

But I cannot, since that would mean violating something that rules my life and that is a strong bias for logical reasoning, but that is my bias, and I have to live with it ;).

---------------------------------------------------

So, let's agree to disagree :angel: , so far that seems fair to me.

Next time I play WoC I'd ask if the person paid for the upgrade and his interpretation on the rule.

Then, I'll suggest a D6 roll. 1-2 case A, 3-4 Case B1, 5-6 Case B2.

Lord Zarkov
19-12-2008, 15:49
The fact that is says 'upgrade ensorcelled weapons to lances' with ensorcelled weapons as a specific piece of equipment rather then have say a special rule 'ensorcelled weapons' and then 'upgrade hand weapons to lances' similar to how wights work in VC seems very clear that you lose the ensorcelled weapons.

And it's not even like ensorcelled weapons count as another weapon type, they're their own type, like a 'great weapon' or a 'lance' is it's own type.

Lord Malorne
19-12-2008, 20:24
Lord Malorned - As I said - regardless of the word used preceding "ensorcelled weapons to lances", the actual WEAPON is a lance. They could have used swap, change, buy, replace, etc, and they would still be normal lances.

It does not say ensorcelled lance, therefore it isn't. It does say lance, so it is a lance. Without anything specifc (such as, I don't know, "ensorcelled lance") then it is NOT an ensorcelled weapon.

Again - you are misreading the rule and ignoring the fact the weapon you are buying is a lance. Nothing more, nothing less, jsut a lance.

No I am ignoring nothing, a forest dragon has poisonous breath...its not got the poison rule!

The spear of twilight had to be FAQ'ed to include the word spear! As have many other weapons!

It is possible that it will be FAQ'ed as:

A:Exchange/Replace/Swap Ensorcelled weapons for lances.

B:Upgrade Ensorcelled weapons to Ensorcelled lances.

Now, of interesting note, is the fact it says in the current non FAQ'ed rule options, the word Upgrade Ensorcelled weapons to lances...

lparigi34
19-12-2008, 20:31
The fact that is says 'upgrade ensorcelled weapons to lances' with ensorcelled weapons as a specific piece of equipment rather then have say a special rule 'ensorcelled weapons' and then 'upgrade hand weapons to lances' similar to how wights work in VC seems very clear that you lose the ensorcelled weapons.

And it's not even like ensorcelled weapons count as another weapon type, they're their own type, like a 'great weapon' or a 'lance' is it's own type.

I agree this should go like this, I hope you do not take my position to be the contrary.

I just do not understand, at all, why do you have to pay for this so called "upgrade". As an example, look at Empire. Using GW while mounted cost the same as using Lance while mounted.

And GWs are a lot worst than ensorcelled weapons. By analogy if you trade ensorcelled weapons for lances, you should be given a few points back, not paying for this.

That's why I´ve been so vehement in my point. Its bad ruling as it is, so I´d give the chance to truly "upgrade" for the 5 points, as with the real "upgrade", I believe is just fairly priced.

Also, as I said before, more points to be distracted in an already high priced unit... nice for my cannons.

logan054
19-12-2008, 20:46
I just do not understand, at all, why do you have to pay for this so called "upgrade". As an example, look at Empire. Using GW while mounted cost the same as using Lance while mounted.

To be honest i feel like that about alot of the things in the chaos book, i dont understand why you pay the same price for a mark no matter what unit ist on, i cant see why MoK is more points on the warshrine than MoT which gives it a 3+ wardsave.

I cant understand why you dont get a eotg roll for killing champions and why they made such a bad rule for the army.

I dont understand what phill kelly was thinking when he wrote the gifts of chaos, most of them are pretty pointless.

I dont understand why a Khorne daemon prince isnt really a option with the current book, best you can hope for is a guy who eats people...

I dont understand why exalted champions are 110pts, they wernt overpriced before and i cant understand why chaos lords are 210pts.

I think im gona stop my list here because it will endup being rather long, the point is that alot of the things in teh book make no sense what so ever and i really dont think the book was all that well thought out, chaos knight lances being just another example.

It would be nice if they faq lances so the +! strength and magical wepaons rule is appiled ontop of this but i doubt it, histpry has taught me that when they faq chaos stuff it usuallty isnt in the favor of the army (MoK on knights, beast herds ranking up 4 wide vs single models).

Lord Malorne
19-12-2008, 20:48
Well as I ponited out, the last three words are 'weapons to lances' does that not make them ensorcelled lances? as you are upgrading them (ensorcelled...) weapons TO lances, so the weapons (sords, axes and so on) become ensoreclelled lances as the ensorcelled weapons are....upgraded...to....

...

lparigi34
19-12-2008, 21:31
...MoK on knights, beast herds ranking up 4 wide vs single models...

I SOOOOO agree with you. This was actually the MOST, by far, stupid ruling I've ever herd about. Just took away the only useful rule for the unit, which was being able to gain R&F bonuses while being skirmishers... gosh... I feel sick again... why did you bring this one up... :cries:


Well as I pointed out, the last three words are 'weapons to lances' does that not make them ensorcelled lances? as you are upgrading them (ensorcelled...) weapons TO lances, so the weapons (sords, axes and so on) become ensoreclelled lances as the ensorcelled weapons are....upgraded...to.......

it depends on where the parentheses are, if you were a programmer it would go like this... Upgrade is the instruction, Weapons and Lances are the objects and Ensorcelled is a property;

Upgrade (Ensorcelled Weapons) to Lances

Vs

Upgrade Ensorcelled (Weapons to Lances)...

But as they previously defined "ensorcelled weapons", as single item, then the correct interpretation is the 1st one.

Now, who can guess what the original intent was :rolleyes:

Lord Malorne
19-12-2008, 21:38
But to be (mundane) lances would be to ignore the words 'upgrade' (which is easy enough) and 'to' (also easy) but both would require changing two words in the sentence to make the (mundane) lances and not (ensorcelled) lances.

Too many for me...but its upto the player loacal gaming group (as I have said :p) ;).

nosferatu1001
20-12-2008, 11:13
Lord Malorne - you don't need to ignore them - when you "upgrade" from spears to lances, you are upgrading from the single item "spear" to the single item "lances"

In this case you are upgrading from "ensorcelled weapons" to "lances" - both are single items by the definition given for ensorcelled weapons; nothing tells you that "ensorcelled" stays behind and gets applied to the lances ;)

the correct way to read it is to put quotes around the singular, well defined items. If you do this it becomes obvious that you go from one single item to another.

I'll say again - it states lances and not ensorcelled lances. without the latter, there is no way they can be anything other than normal, mundane, standard lances. And it IS an upgrade - you get an extra point of strength on the charge. This can be important in some situations, just not in others.

Rooze
20-12-2008, 12:18
I feel as is the pro's and the con's players are going about this in circles over and over AND OVER again! It's getting tiresome. Why don't you/we all mail this discussion to GW, and force them to bring out a FAQ pretty soon? It seems that GW is the only one able to make a definitive statement in this!

Condottiere
20-12-2008, 12:36
A lot of people do.

Lord Malorne
20-12-2008, 13:35
Ensorcelled ''weapons'' to ''lances''.

:D.

Anton
20-12-2008, 14:00
I'm with Lord Malorne. When paying the 5 points, you keep the special rules for Ensorcelled Weapons on top of the lances. What may cause confusion is that Ensorcelled Weapons are written as part of their equipment in the army list. However, if you look in the bestiary, Ensorcelled Weapons are placed under 'Special Rules'.

"Upgrade ensorcelled weapons to lances". To me, that strongly indicates that the lances remain ensorcelled. However, the FAQ will tell.

lparigi34
20-12-2008, 16:35
... if you look in the bestiary, Ensorcelled Weapons are placed under 'Special Rules'.

This is an excellent observation, since then it puts ensorcelled weapons under the same category of the wight blades... Nice.

nosferatu1001
20-12-2008, 16:59
Except "ensorcelled weapons" are listed as a singular rule, meaning the quotes have to go around both words - they are NOT ensorcelled "weapons" at all.

Thus, you upgrade from the weapon type "ensorcelled weapons" to the weapon type "lances"

really, can people not get this? ;)

Atanatos
20-12-2008, 17:30
Gentlemen,

I don´t think there needs to be an argument. If Chaos Knights were to have S7 on the charge, then their rules would be as follows:
S5 on their profile,
magical attacks as special rule,
and the option for lances.
And joining the side of those who point to the difference between ensorcelled weapons and lances as that of two types of weaponry, I conclude that Chaos Knights indeed pay 5 points to lose magical +1S attacks.

Wether this is worth it - not sure. But a shock unit of (Khorne) Chaos Knights with hero and lances works better against T4 AS4+ than their normally armed fellows. Fear and heavy casualties should break any resistance rather soon. And for the continued +1S for the ensorelled weapons: Why would I have my 200+ (and rather a lot of "+"!) chaos knights spend their time in combats they´ll probably lose, because the enemy brings reinforcements i cannot?
Except for most undead armies and perhaps lizzies.

Just my two pence.

FranticDaemon
20-12-2008, 17:54
The main problem is that "Ensorcelled Weapons" are listed as special rule in bestiary (kinda like Wight Blades for grave guard and black knights), but in army list they are listed as equipment. Since rules confront each other only logical solution now would be to wait for an errata and use either friendly agreement or roll 4+ until then.

Griefbringer
20-12-2008, 21:05
The main problem is that "Ensorcelled Weapons" are listed as special rule in bestiary (kinda like Wight Blades for grave guard and black knights), but in army list they are listed as equipment.

This reminds me of the Wardancer Weapons special rule in the wood elf book.

lparigi34
22-12-2008, 14:58
This is an excellent observation, since then it puts ensorcelled weapons under the same category of the wight blades... Nice.

@ Nosferatu: did you at least bother to read about this before posting?. No trolling meant, just please note we have precedents to this situation.


Except "ensorcelled weapons" are listed as a singular rule, meaning the quotes have to go around both words - they are NOT ensorcelled "weapons" at all.

Thus, you upgrade from the weapon type "ensorcelled weapons" to the weapon type "lances"

really, can people not get this? ;)

No, I don't :D... I do not know how long you've been around, but as said before, we have previous situations similar to the current in discussion, namely two of them, TK "wight blades" and WE "wardancer weapons".


The main problem is that "Ensorcelled Weapons" are listed as special rule in bestiary (kinda like Wight Blades for grave guard and black knights), but in army list they are listed as equipment. Since rules confront each other only logical solution now would be to wait for an errata and use either friendly agreement or roll 4+ until then.

Nicely put.


This reminds me of the Wardancer Weapons special rule in the wood elf book.

Just more wisdom for this thread, much appreciatted.

nosferatu1001
22-12-2008, 16:42
I did read it, however it is still a defined term with no supporting text to illustrate that they are "ensorcelled" due to the Knight holding them, which is the inference from wardancer weapons (the wielder in that case being the source of the power, not the weapon) and as such I treat them as a weapon category, much like hand weapon (which can be many forms) and spears, lances etc. I normally go by the army list summary as the correct version, as it is the most concise form. This is however the opposite of 40k, where the summary is almost always wrong ;)

The simplest explanation, which requires the least assumptions, is that you do, indeed, only get Lances, and do not retain any properties of the weapons you dropped. The term upgrade is still correct as S6 can definitely be an upgrade, it is just situational. [e.g. against AS 3+ / T6 etc]

While there is precendent, I think it is weak and overriden by the terms used and the context given. THis does mean, however, that all could change in a FAQ. Given that the person who wrote it said they ARENT ensorcelled will hopefully stop this however ;)

loveless
22-12-2008, 17:23
Given that the person who wrote it said they ARENT ensorcelled will hopefully stop this however ;)

I wouldn't bet on it, when the same person who wrote it both
1) said slaying champions doesn't give an EotG roll and
2) rolled on the EotG table every time he killed a champion in a recent WD battle report

Mr. Kelly likes to change his mind, it appears. Which probably just attributes to his chaotic nature :p I've no opinion on the Ensorcelled weapons debate, but I certainly wouldn't give much weight to the currently stated opinions of the author.

lparigi34
22-12-2008, 19:12
I did read it, however it is still a defined term with no supporting text to illustrate that they are "ensorcelled" due to the Knight holding them, which is the inference from wardancer weapons (the wielder in that case being the source of the power, not the weapon) and as such I treat them as a weapon category, much like hand weapon (which can be many forms) and spears, lances etc. I normally go by the army list summary as the correct version, as it is the most concise form. This is however the opposite of 40k, where the summary is almost always wrong ;)

The simplest explanation, which requires the least assumptions, is that you do, indeed, only get Lances, and do not retain any properties of the weapons you dropped. The term upgrade is still correct as S6 can definitely be an upgrade, it is just situational. [e.g. against AS 3+ / T6 etc]

While there is precendent, I think it is weak and overriden by the terms used and the context given. THis does mean, however, that all could change in a FAQ. Given that the person who wrote it said they ARENT ensorcelled will hopefully stop this however ;)

Remember that in the explanatory section for the weapon, it is listed under "special rules", else, I would not be even bothering.


I wouldn't bet on it, when the same person who wrote it both
1) said slaying champions doesn't give an EotG roll and
2) rolled on the EotG table every time he killed a champion in a recent WD battle report

Mr. Kelly likes to change his mind, it appears. Which probably just attributes to his chaotic nature :p I've no opinion on the Ensorcelled weapons debate, but I certainly wouldn't give much weight to the currently stated opinions of the author.

LOLZ :D

nosferatu1001
22-12-2008, 19:17
I wouldn't bet on it, when the same person who wrote it both
1) said slaying champions doesn't give an EotG roll and
2) rolled on the EotG table every time he killed a champion in a recent WD battle report

Mr. Kelly likes to change his mind, it appears. Which probably just attributes to his chaotic nature :p I've no opinion on the Ensorcelled weapons debate, but I certainly wouldn't give much weight to the currently stated opinions of the author.

Howevcer - this was from a recent, after publication podcast, and the WD battle report was from when the rules were still in trial. Remember WD is about 3+months behind!

Slaying champions definitely does NOT give an EotG roll, as they are not characters.

loveless
22-12-2008, 21:16
Howevcer - this was from a recent, after publication podcast, and the WD battle report was from when the rules were still in trial. Remember WD is about 3+months behind!

Slaying champions definitely does NOT give an EotG roll, as they are not characters.

Regardless, it still shows that Kelly can't make up his mind. He could very well change it again by the time the FAQ comes around, on that as well as ensorcelled weapons and other things.

nosferatu1001
22-12-2008, 21:26
It was a playtest, they must have determined it was imbalanced to allow the roll

For example they playtested letting CDX:Daemons deepstrike assault. for two minutes until they realised it was horrific!

Goruax
22-12-2008, 21:46
It was a playtest, they must have determined it was imbalanced to allow the roll

Awesome.
So you mean the playtesting before the Armybook was released?
The ruling they found imbalanced, during pre-release testing, wasn't removed?

So it wasn't really that imbalancing then?

Please don't assume to know what someone else is thinking.
Assumptions are the mother of all *******-ups.

nosferatu1001
22-12-2008, 21:56
Erm, well it seems play testing involved allowing a roll if a champion was killed

The current rules don't, ergo something was changed.

That kind of suggests it was removed? Or have I misread your post, where you seem to have misread mine - I said something was removed, you said it wasnt.... EDIT: unless you meant it was not remvoed for the WD article? They are commonly still playtesting when the WD battel reports are run...

And I'm not assuming what someone else is thinking, the author of the book and the rules has stated that champions don't allow rolls. Along with "of course you just get lances, not some magic S7 lances that aren't supported by the rules" [of course, that last bit might be a paraphrase brought on by your overly harsh post, potentially]

decker_cky
22-12-2008, 22:06
The thought that upgrade must be better isn't really true, but even if true, it mustn't be better in every way. It's an upgrade to be S6 on the charge, even at the cost of being S4 when not charging and losing magical attacks.

Ensorcelled weapons is listed as a special rule in the unit overview. That's nice, but in the unit entry, it's a specific piece of equipment. The special rule was explaining the piece of equipment. The piece of equipment is upgraded into lances, which aren't ensorcelled.

Further argument: If the lances were ensorcelled, they wouldn't act as lances. They would only grant +1 S and magical attacks, since they count as magical weapons.

The argument that they're ensorcelled lances really doesn't have a strong backing. You have to grasp at every possible straws and use arguments like "the developer changed his mind elsewhere" to make it stand.

nosferatu1001
23-12-2008, 10:52
As above - if they said "ensorcelled lances" this would not be sufficient for them to be ensorcelled weapons and normal lances combined; there would have to be an additional sentence giving the precise rule for this mythical "ensorcelled lance", of the form:


Non existent Ensorcelled Lance
Lance; confers +1S bonus to model in addition to any other bonus; magical attacks

AS there is only the sentence "upgrade ensorcelled weapons to lances" this is not sufficient for it to count as the above.

So, anyone else? Any other spurious arguments that don't hold up to magic item rules?

Condottiere
23-12-2008, 10:57
I got bored and lost some time ago.

All I can say is that the lances are a non-magical upgrade to S6 on the charge.

Ensorcelled weapons seem to be like daemonic gifts.

Neckutter
23-12-2008, 19:55
the OotG rule isnt imbalanced if it include unit champions. ive played 6 games with my WoC and got to roll 3 times on the chart. only once did the gift i got mean anything.(yay causing fear/MR3/stupidity)

if the FAQ comes out and doesnt let you roll on it for unit champs, then it is the lamest rule ever. why even have a chart that you never roll on and when you do, you might not even want the result? boo to you phil kelly, BOO TO YOU!

but as to chaos knights, they have ensorcelled weapons, or they have mundane lances. stop trying to read anything into the entry.

lparigi34
23-12-2008, 20:21
I agree with you. I play against Chaos, and even though I played so lousy in my last game that I lost due to plain stupidity, I support including Champs will not make the rule broken at all... or at least not much... though:

I think the rule is good as it is now, meant probably mostly to be used with the shrines and for a cool addition to your characters. Fluff wise, who is a lousy unit champion to mean a Chaos hero any glory for for killing it?

Anyway, not that a wise player will let his unit champ face your character for the sake of giving you such a bonus :p, so just refusing the challenge will be usually good enough to negate it for you. Not that anyone expects lousy unit champs to survive a round of fighting against Chaos characters ;)