PDA

View Full Version : Miscast harm Question



Zubb
25-12-2008, 12:32
How to RAWingly prove that Miscast-caused hits are maggical?

Condottiere
25-12-2008, 12:39
Doesn't specify one way or the other, so you have to assume they aren't.

GodlessM
25-12-2008, 12:56
I would assume they are, since it is essentially the magical energies of a spell backfiring on the wizard.

Lord Zarkov
25-12-2008, 15:13
Where does it say hits caused by spells are magical?

Except for the fact they're in the magic section of the rulebook.

Zubb
25-12-2008, 16:22
Is there any strict definition of what goes as magical?

Lord Zarkov
25-12-2008, 16:40
Not that I can find. Some units with vunerabilities to magical attacks say something along the lines of 'such as from spells and magic items' in the wording for the vunerability, but that's about it, nothing in the 'magic' section of the BRB says that it's a 'magical attack', so either none of them are, or we're supposed to just take it as read that things from that section are by definition magical.

GodlessM
25-12-2008, 17:14
Where does it say hits caused by spells are magical?

Except for the fact they're in the magic section of the rulebook.


Pick nits much?

Zubb
25-12-2008, 17:27
@ Godlessm

sory what? i m just not that good at english

Neckutter
25-12-2008, 18:19
i read the book and appearantly the miscast "hits" arent magical. although it does say something to the effect of "the wizard loses control of the energies" blah. but then again it could be the wizard getting thrown down on the ground, or it could be something like a loud noise that hits him... not necessarily magic. there is nothing conclussive that i would see, but it is ambiguous.

if your opponent has a ward save that only works when the hits are either magical/non-magical, then i would just 4+ it and move on.

Fellblade
25-12-2008, 19:37
I'd say because it goes on in the magic phase and is the result of a spell its a magical hit. After all, Burning Head or Wall of Fire don't say "This is a magical attack", yet because they are the effects of a spell they're considered magical attacks.

Kalandros
25-12-2008, 20:11
Its the same problem with Caradryan, his ability "calls down the Wrath of Asuryan" to cause d6 wounds and yet it doesn't specify "magical" so people play it that the Wrath of a God isn't magical.

Condottiere
25-12-2008, 21:05
I believe damage from miscasts can't be saved against, if they wound. In the case of Caradryan, do ward saves count?

Neckutter
25-12-2008, 21:51
if you have a ward save, you get it with miscasts and the wrath of blah. miscast wounds are "no armor saves".

and anyways, "Wrath of Asuryan" isnt magical.
and wounds from spells ARE magical because they are magic spells. check it out.

the best way to get over it is just 4+ it.

Zubb
25-12-2008, 23:26
Condottiere, if they are not, for ex. etheral Vampire is quite close to being miscast-immune.

Condottiere
25-12-2008, 23:38
I don't know about the ethereal vampire, but during the past three minutes looking over the Miscast section and the FAQ, I see no mention that the Miscast causes magical damage.

As regards the ethereal vampire, I'd say miscast damage, if inflicted, should affect him too.

BEEGfrog
25-12-2008, 23:49
Miscast damage is magica because it come from the mechanics of a magical spell without the rules saying they are non-magical. This is similar to the effects of mundane items being non-magical unless the rules specifically say that in a specific circumstance that the are or count as magical.

I.e. if it starts with magic, spells and/or magic items it stays magical unless it specifically says so; but if it starts out mundane, shooting, or melee it stays mundane unless it specifically says so or magic is integral (i.e. see first part of sentence if magic is involved).

Laugh scornfully at an opponent that suggests rolling for it; suggest he goes for 1, 2 or 3 so he has a chance of rolling higher than his IQ; before eventually agreeing to the roll off because it is so obvious that it is never actually stated in the rule book but the roll off method is...

Zubb
25-12-2008, 23:52
ouch the roll off method iis no good for tournies ^^

Necromancy Black
25-12-2008, 23:52
Ok, so can anyone tell me where exactly it says:

-Spells do magical attacks
-Magic Weapons do magic attacks
-other magic items that do damage do magic attacks

Cause I can't find anywhere where it says that they are. It appears that the entire section of Magic, items and spells, is simply assumed to all do magical attacks. There does not seem to be a set rule on this written by GW.

So, unless someone can find a rule I've missed, Miscasts would have to fall under the same assumption and be classed as magical attacks.

Lord Zarkov
26-12-2008, 00:00
In the same way though there is absolutly nothing in ANY spell description in the warhammer rulebook to say that the hits are magical, but, as many people have correctly pointed out, they are "cos they're the effects of magic spells, duh!".
Heck, there isn't even anything more in the magic section of the rulebook to indicate that hits from magic weapons are magical than to indicate miscast results are magical.

The only things to indicate that they are is that they are, well in the magic section of the rulebook, and the varying examples of magical things in certain units' descriptions.

E.g. the Etherial rules which say 'spells and magical attacks and effects'. The miscast table is arguably a spell effect, and is deffinitely an effect cause by magic so would come under this description.

And like spells, magic weapons, etc - described entirely and exclusively in the magic section of the rulebook.

ps @ GodlessM: simply pointly out the absurdity of expecting to be told effects of magic (presented in the magic section) are magical in order to believe they are.

Edit: ninja'd by Necromancy Black, who I must admit puts it much more elegantly

Condottiere
26-12-2008, 00:25
1. While I think that miscast damage originates from a magical effect, the BRB doesn't state this.

2. Just because an effect comes from a magical source, doesn't necesarily make it magical, example arrow from HE Reaver Bow.

3. It is possible to make certain assumptions, even if it is not specifically stated so, example Teclis is a High Elven Archmage.

4. Therefore, unless otherwise stated, magic weapons and spells will deliver magic attacks.

Fellblade
26-12-2008, 03:49
In the same way though there is absolutly nothing in ANY spell description in the warhammer rulebook to say that the hits are magical,
Really? Because when something says "this is a magic missile" that pretty much says its magical.

High elf reaver bow is shooting a mundane arrow... the arrow is what's doing the damage.

I still say the miscast is a (unintended) result of a spell, and spells are by definition magical.

Kalandros
26-12-2008, 04:50
Only Wood Elf Magic Bows shoot mundane arrows, don't apply things from one army's FAQ to everything when it doesn't apply.

The Reaver bow shoots magic arrows that are at S5, its not the Bow that is S5, its the Arrows. While Wood Elf bows give Rerolls to hit and whatnot, which the Bow is enchanted to do, not the arrows.

Lord Zarkov
26-12-2008, 09:33
1. While I think that miscast damage originates from a magical effect, the BRB doesn't state this.

2. Just because an effect comes from a magical source, doesn't necesarily make it magical, example arrow from HE Reaver Bow.

3. It is possible to make certain assumptions, even if it is not specifically stated so, example Teclis is a High Elven Archmage.

4. Therefore, unless otherwise stated, magic weapons and spells will deliver magic attacks.

A miscast is an effect from attempting to cast a spell, it is by definition a magical effect in the sme way as the succesful results of a spell and has no less information to tell us it's magical.

@ Fellblade: magic missile just refers to rules a few pages back which still has no instructions that it does magical damage such as is trying to be found in the miscast descriptions.

Also Note: I'm not actually claiming that spells aren't magical, i'm using proof by absurdity to show that miscast results are magical, as assuming you need to be explicitly told things in the magic section are magical leads to absurd situations like described.

Fellblade
26-12-2008, 18:35
@ Fellblade: magic missile just refers to rules a few pages back which still has no instructions that it does magical damage such as is trying to be found in the miscast descriptions.
Let me try to show you another way....

MAGIC missile.

How are you going to argue that's not magic? I think you'll find the rules in the "magic" section.

Reinnon
27-12-2008, 11:18
Warhammer isn't like say... magic the gatherin which has strict definitions for things. Its a fairly open ended rulebook.

As people have pointed out: no where does it state in precise letters "all damage by magic is magical" - why? Because GW thought it was such an obvious point that they didn't include it.

If we assume that the spell lores do magical damage, not because of a precise rule telling us that it is but through (yes.. i'm going to say it) common sense, is it that much of a leap to say that the miscast effects are also magical? They are in the same part of rulebook, and only an idiot could read the description and not think "ah, its magical!" - for petes sake we are talking about wizards getting eaten by daemons here.

It strikes me as rule lawyering to the extreme to say that an Eth. Vampire is somehow immune to the dangers of magic.

Harwammer
27-12-2008, 14:14
for petes sake we are talking about wizards getting eaten by daemons here.

Not if its a WoC daemon prince doing the eating :P

Goruax
27-12-2008, 15:59
In that case it's one of Khorne's anti-magic daemons nomming on Daemon Prince #503's sorcerous head.

Lord Zarkov
27-12-2008, 18:54
Let me try to show you another way....

MAGIC missile.

How are you going to argue that's not magic? I think you'll find the rules in the "magic" section.

I'm not, because it clearly is.

Which is exactaly my point...

Proof by absurdity that things in the magic section are magical, regardless of if they have 'magical' written in thier description, which none of them do.

popisdead
04-01-2009, 17:20
how about you just play instead of try to RAW everything your way?

Necromancy Black
04-01-2009, 23:13
Let me try to show you another way....

MAGIC missile.

How are you going to argue that's not magic? I think you'll find the rules in the "magic" section.

Hows about Flame Cannon, and Spout Flames?

I wouldn't trust the names of things to determine what speacial rules they follow :D

But in this case it appears to be an assumption that anything in the magic section of the BRB and army books do magical attacks.

blindingdark
07-01-2009, 11:21
@BEEGfrog - sig'd for comedy. awesome

This MUST be a joke ! does anyone really think that a miscast is not magical ?
The name of something does NOT dictate its rules, as in the example above with the flame cannon etc. however, to say that a miscast is not magical is ludercris.

it is the result of a spell gone wrong, a magical spell. when this happens the Magic unleashed causes the damage. how can this not be a magic attack ?

can someone explain the justification of this ? i have read the argument that it is not stated as magical but come on, really.