PDA

View Full Version : rending stars + manbane?



mossel
22-01-2009, 17:58
In the tournament scene, more than a few DE players tend to field assassins with rending weapons and manbane.

Is there a FAQ (GW, Direwolf...) that makes clear whether or not you can get S7 with this combo or if you max out at S6?

Please help me out!

Nurgling Chieftain
22-01-2009, 19:04
A common question, argued over a great deal:

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174768

Lord Dan
22-01-2009, 19:16
Manbane specifies that the strength cannot be taken over 6. Whether combined with rending stars or not, if you use Manbane you must meet that condition.

Freenut
22-01-2009, 19:42
http://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/dark-elves-qa-on-the-rules/

Q and A from Gav Himself. 4th. question down.

Neckutter
22-01-2009, 19:59
no to S7. you cant blow up chariots.

Zoolander
22-01-2009, 20:09
Manbane specifies that the strength cannot be taken over 6. Whether combined with rending stars or not, if you use Manbane you must meet that condition.

I wish it was that simple. If you apply manbane first then the stars would definitely add +1 st. If you apply the stars first then the st would be 6.

I don't care what gav intended. Well have to wait and see what gw finally rules on. That's all that matters.

Lord Dan
22-01-2009, 20:48
How can you say you apply manbane "first"? They both apply, and since the one item you are using restricts going over S6, any other weapons would be useless. It's like using an item that makes you immune to psychology, and taking another that allows you to re-roll panic checks. It's not like you apply them in a specific order, and the one restricts the other's use.

Draconian77
22-01-2009, 21:18
It's S6, if your playing it any other way well then "generic comment about your level of sportmanship!"

Hah! Take that you fiend!

Necromancy Black
22-01-2009, 21:27
Because manbane changes the stats of the Assasin, and rendering stars add +1 to the str of the range attack. That's where all this comes from, two sources of str increasment that apply to two different areas. If Manbane was worded clearly this wouldn't happen but as we've seen from WoC, that's not one of Gav's strong points.

The single answer is, it's still being debated by both sides, it will continue to be debated by both sides until GW release an official FAQ.

Now with that sorted, can we not have another bloody thread on this?

Neckutter
22-01-2009, 21:51
request denied.



heh, that being said people need to read the first part, where manbane says it counts the assassin's attacks are +1 from the toughness of things. thusly a T5 chariot would not have to worry at all about rending stars blowing them up. last DE book there was confusion until the FAQ. this time around DE players want to game the system as well, but Gav has said over and over that the intentions were for the S to be capped at 6.
ignoring the rules, because it gives you an advantage is called cheating.

Condottiere
22-01-2009, 22:42
Problem is how you sequence the items. However, I haven't met anyone who insists on the S7 interpretation.

Neckutter
22-01-2009, 22:47
oh, yes that is evident. however this same argument happened in the 6th edition book with DE. im pretty sure it was the exact same argument with the same combo as well. it failed then, and is failing now.

if the author of the book saying that S6 is the max you get with rending stars and manbane, i dont know what to tell those people.

Draconian77
22-01-2009, 22:53
this time around DE players want to game the system as well,

I'm quite offended, frankly, I have been playing with DE for years now and the intent is clearly to cap the S value at 6.

Please don't make anymore sweeping generalisations.
Not ~all~ DE players want it to be S7, some of us really do want a more balanced and (semi)realistic game.

Nurgling Chieftain
22-01-2009, 23:10
Problem is how you sequence the items.Perhaps the problem should instead be considered to be whether you sequence the items. I think people just like to assume the existence of a sequence when none exists. Applying both does not automatically mean applying one, then applying the other; in fact, unless a sequence is specifically defined, I would say that no such sequence exists and the effects are applied simultaneously.

Condottiere
22-01-2009, 23:48
At which point you dice off. :D

Zoolander
23-01-2009, 07:31
How can you say you apply manbane "first"? They both apply, and since the one item you are using restricts going over S6, any other weapons would be useless. It's like using an item that makes you immune to psychology, and taking another that allows you to re-roll panic checks. It's not like you apply them in a specific order, and the one restricts the other's use.

Technically, Manbane simply states that it's effects are limited to ST6. It does not (and frankly, cannot) limit the user's ST to 6 in any other capacity. For this reason, it is possible that the Stars grant a ST7 attack. Do I think assassin's should have ST7 throwing stars? No. And I don't use them. But they exist in the current rules, and until otherwise corrected, I say go for it. In the same line that salamanders don't shoot "flaming attacks" (yet), skeletons are affected by poison (or any ranged weapon that isn't a gun or war machine), High Elf lords bounce flaming cannonballs off their chests unharmed, and flyers release (and get hit by) fanatics as they approach, the rules are simply not based on real life physics. Those that would cry "That's unrealistic!" obviously haven't seen the steam tank, goblin fanatics, or the mechanical steam horse. This isn't an historical battle game. If you wanted realism, you chose poorly.

Your example is flawed, as Rending Stars and Manbane are actually made to be used together, and do not oppose each other, unlike the items you've listed.

Again, until GW releases an FAQ, there will be no consensus on this issue.

nosferatu1001
23-01-2009, 07:50
Salamanders (and warpfire throwers etc) do now cause flaming attacks, see the FAQ part 2 ;)

But no - unless you can show there is a sequence, you apply both effects at the same time. As one has an explicit cap, that would seem to set the limit. S6 it is :D

Kadrium
23-01-2009, 17:32
The fact that the guy who wrote the book stated his intent of the rules and people are arguing against that stated authorial intent is simply mind boggling to me.

Draconian77
24-01-2009, 01:32
Heh,

Welcome to Warseer.

Seriously though, S6. :D

sulla
24-01-2009, 02:11
The fact that the guy who wrote the book stated his intent of the rules and people are arguing against that stated authorial intent is simply mind boggling to me.

From memory, didn't he also say that he wrote the handbows with longer range too? Not everything the writer wants to happen makes it to the final printing.

Personally, I never play it as s7. Seems a little silly to me that using a throwing star instead of handbow results in exploding chariots. But I wouldn't be overly fussed either way.

EvC
24-01-2009, 17:28
"From memory" is useless, because there's probably something else in the quote. In the link provided, he specifically states that the S7 throwing stars came up in playtesting, and he modified the wording to relfect that they should never go above S6. He failed to do it clearly, so in this case, designers intent should trump the other, ridiculous interpretation. Unfortunately, Dark Elf fanboys have been advising the Design Team on the FAQ, and for some reason I expect them to be listened to over Gav Thorpe...

Coram_Boy
24-01-2009, 17:59
As EvC said, given that Thorpe actually referred to the question in hand, the stars should be strength 6.

Wapniak
25-01-2009, 19:19
But are not... A few stupid interpretations in the FAQu overall.

http://ca.games-workshop.com/WhiteDwarf/download/2006Errata/Errata/WH/2008_DarkElves_FAQ.pdf

We can still however ignore it or 4+ it.

chivalrous
25-01-2009, 21:29
But are not... A few stupid interpretations in the FAQu overall.

http://ca.games-workshop.com/WhiteDwarf/download/2006Errata/Errata/WH/2008_DarkElves_FAQ.pdf

We can still however ignore it or 4+ it.

In friendly games perhaps but in Tournaments, expect to be hit with the RAW stick if you try to suggest that.
*shrugs* I have to say I've never seen the appeal in rending stars, shurikens don't seem very 'Elfy' to me.

Condottiere
25-01-2009, 21:36
Yes, but they fit the ninja stereotype that GW wants to give DE assassins.

chivalrous
25-01-2009, 21:46
Yes, but they fit the ninja stereotype that GW wants to give DE assassins.

*grumble* Ninja's don't have big flowy cloaks, unless they're Batman.

Necromancy Black
25-01-2009, 22:01
Thankfully this issue is now at rest. Now we can all concentrate on argueing about the poorly wirtten WoC book instead.

Condottiere
25-01-2009, 22:21
Yeah, this is finished. Hopefully WoC FAQ will be less controversial.

Neckutter
26-01-2009, 04:45
wow, i really think GW dropped the ball.
pendant of khaleth's wording doesnt "replace the brb's wording of a 1 always fails" but for some reason... blah.
rending stars+ manbane=S7?... blah
lifetaker's attack not magical?.... blah

oh well, i guess i wont play my T5 chariots against DE. good thing TKs have lame chariots!

nosferatu1001
26-01-2009, 07:41
It does replace the wording by defining a 1 as a success - and BRB is superceded in conflict by the Armybook.

Not sure about rending stars and manbane, however i rarely see this combination - much like with Tunnelling teams you're normally better of fighting than throwing stuff :D However it is arguably RAW, and imho a similar "issue" to the can Shoota nobs take a PK which was a matter of order - they seem to go for the most beenficial "order" to apply things, not the strictest.

The only controversial one was lifetaker, however it does suggest that magic ranged weapons can fire ordinary arrows / bolts, its the weapon itself that is magical not the ammunition.

Ikhoornix
26-01-2009, 10:38
Lifetaker not having magical attacks is in line with the rules for the WE magical bows.
The attacks from Magical arrows are magical attacks, normal arrows shot from a magical bow are not.

chivalrous
26-01-2009, 11:46
Lifetaker not having magical attacks is in line with the rules for the WE magical bows.
The attacks from Magical arrows are magical attacks, normal arrows shot from a magical bow are not.

Although not, as far as I'm aware, in line with the High elven magic bows.

Condottiere
26-01-2009, 12:34
High Elf magical bows don't cause magic damage.

chivalrous
26-01-2009, 16:58
High Elf magical bows don't cause magic damage.

And at this point I and Malekith would love you to tell me where that's written.
As far as I can see in the High Elf FAQ, there is nothing on record as saying they don't cause magical damage and still there's the line in the rulebook saying that magical weapons cause magical damage.
It's the same reason the Lifetaker question had to be asked.
There is nothing to say that magic bows do not cause magic damage as other magic weapons do, other than the inference by the Wood Elf and now by the Dark Elf rulings. Which I'm more than happy to go along with. I'm just sick and tired of having this conversation with High Elf players.

Condottiere
26-01-2009, 17:21
Admittingly, it is inferred from the WE FAQ, but is consistent if the ammunition has to be purchased separately. I'm not saying that attacks from a magic bow shouldn't be magical, but then it might be better to make those arrows single use enchanted items.

chivalrous
26-01-2009, 17:28
Admittingly, it is inferred from the WE FAQ, but is consistent if the ammunition has to be purchased separately. I'm not saying that attacks from a magic bow shouldn't be magical, but then it might be better to make those arrows single use enchanted items.

And that is the irritating problem that's going to continue.
The High Elves have had two FAQ's since the Wood Elf FAQ and neither have addressed it, but for some reason lifetaker has been. That's the arguement against us.

Nekrodamus
26-01-2009, 17:44
Allthough I own VC and no elves, the ruling about the non-magical arrows ist just silly. Beside the fact that the BRB doesn't reduce the magical attacks to CC weapons only, we have those Dwarf warmachines which explicitely do magical attacks (even if the rune isn't about doing damage at all).

No problem with S7 throwing stars, since I don't use chariots at tourneys at all, but ignoring the author's known intention like this is weird.

Shadowblade using two types of poison? My armybook reads that all of a model's weapons are coated with the same poison and that the three special mixtures replace ordinary poison!?

chivalrous
26-01-2009, 18:18
Shadowblade using two types of poison? My armybook reads that all of a model's weapons are coated with the same poison and that the three special mixtures replace ordinary poison!?

But Shadowblade is a special character and through the FAQ, obviously has an intended exception to the normal rule, just like Hellebron is allowed to take two magic weapons and Malekith gets two pieces of magic armour. Let's be fair it's not like he gets both Poisoned attacks and Dark Venom in cc, only the dark venom (which I'm a little miffed about, but then I'm miffed he didn't get Hand of Khaine too. I'd have happily paid another 50-60 points for the privilige) if anything it reduces his power in cc a bit.

Nekrodamus
27-01-2009, 07:32
Yes, I can follow your thoughts about him being a SC and this combo being 'less effective than possible' - and sorry for posting in the wrong thread, should be in the one about the new FAQ of course.

Kalandros
27-01-2009, 09:22
Rending Stars (Shadowblade's) cannot make use of Dark Venom so his still apply Poisoned Attacks unlike other Assassin's

Nekrodamus
27-01-2009, 10:57
Can't follow you ...

Every Assassin comes with poisoned mundane weapons, can buy another poison which replaces basic poison and again is coated on all of his mundane weapons.

So if a basic Assasin would buy this combo (which is possible), he simply would have his Stars coated with effectively nothing and would not do autowounds on sixes.

Shadowblade has poisoned Stars not because Dark Venom is useless on them, but because he got a new special rule with the FAQ.

Nurgling Chieftain
27-01-2009, 15:29
Every Assassin comes with poisoned mundane weapons, can buy another poison which replaces basic poison and again is coated on all of his mundane weapons.Strangely, this is not quite true. The poison he starts with does not coat the rending stars, but poisons he buys do. See page 95, Assassin, Special Rules, Poisoned Attacks, and page 99, Toxins.

Shmee
27-01-2009, 16:11
And now its official, manbane + rending star = S7. pew pew!!~~

chivalrous
27-01-2009, 16:41
Strangely, this is not quite true. The poison he starts with does not coat the rending stars, but poisons he buys do. See page 95, Assassin, Special Rules, Poisoned Attacks, and page 99, Toxins.

Hmm I'm pondering poisoned Rending Stars. They aren't magic items, as indicated by the paragraph at the top of the page which states
Unless otherwise stated, these are not magic items. so why wouldn't they be poisoned?
In fact the rule for poisoned attacks doesn't state anything about a weapon having to be mundane to be poisoned, there are no restrictions except that the character must have the poisoned attacks rule. The Poisoned attacks rule doesn't even refer to weapons, only to attacks.
There's nothing in the magic items rules that state a model looses it's poisoned attacks except for the line about a magic weapon ignoring all the rules of it's mundane equivalent. Since poison is a rule for the model and not a rule for the weapon a model carries then there isn't actually antyhing now to stop a model carrying a magic weapon and still getting poisoned attacks. An Assassin with the Venom sword will still get poisoned attacks.
What sicken me is that this isn't even a loophole, the restriction that was present in the previous book has just been removed.

The only rule that Dark Elf toxins have now in regards of what you can use them with, is that they replace poisoned attacks. there is nothing anywhere about not being allowed to use them with a magic weapon, that was only in a rule in the previous army book.

Neckutter
27-01-2009, 17:00
they wouldnt be poisoned because the assassin entry says only their handweapons and handbows are poisoned. the SPECIAL poisons say they affect everything mundane.

Lord Dan
27-01-2009, 17:17
That's a really good point Neckutter. I'd say that's the most definitive proof we have so far.

chivalrous
27-01-2009, 17:19
*relief* thank god for that. Still,there are a few other characters that might have access to this. Lizardmen? Nurgle perhaps?

In which case, although a moot point now that the FAQ has been published, if the toxin replaces poison, it would only be able to be placed where it was bein replaced... if that's not a roundabout way of saying it.
as there's no poison on a Rending star in the first place how can there be anything for the toxin to replace?

Like I say, it's a moot point now that we've had the FAQ for both Manbane AND shadowblade which strongly imply that you can.

Nurgling Chieftain
27-01-2009, 18:28
Sheesh, it's not like I hadn't posted an explicit reference to the precise location of my source. :mad:

Lord Dan
27-01-2009, 19:03
Sheesh, it's not like I hadn't posted an explicit reference to the precise location of my source. :mad:

Good work to you too, Nurgling Chieftain. Unfortunately we've come to expect it from you, so it's a little less impressive.

Nekrodamus
28-01-2009, 00:01
Sorry that I was wrong on this issue. Since I don't play DE by myself (yet), I never recognized this restriction on page 95 but relied on the global poison rules mentioned on page 61. (How silly to have such a blatant contradiction in an armybook).

And now I recognized that this will result in a non poisoned Venom Sword too, which I thought to be to expensive even with poison.

Draconian77
28-01-2009, 00:12
Drastically too expensive or perhaps incredibly underwhelming would best describe the venom sword.

I think it just goes to show you that the people who write these books have a somewhat basic viewpoint of the game.

Lord Dan
28-01-2009, 00:34
I actually like the venom sword. It's a hit or miss item, but when it hits...

I killed Karl Franz on the emperor dragon with one. One attack to Karl, 2 attacks to the dragon. It was a total fluke, but both failed their armor and whatnot, and both failed the toughness test. I know it wasn't sportsmanlike, but I couldn't stop laughing.

Draconian77
28-01-2009, 01:48
I have a sneaking suspicion that something similar must have happened throughout playtesting, Lord choices must have rolled under the odds and the venom sword was priced on its potential damage and not its realistic damage. (So many variables but still...3 S4 attacks will do very little to naught against your average Lord choice.)

Also, now that everyone mentions it, it does kind of irk me that the venom sword doesn't have poisoned attacks.....

Neckutter
28-01-2009, 04:23
I think it just goes to show you that the people who write these books have a somewhat basic viewpoint of the game.

truer words were never spoken!

Lord Dan
28-01-2009, 04:47
Also, now that everyone mentions it, it does kind of irk me that the venom sword doesn't have poisoned attacks.....

As you said, the pricetag makes it evident that playtesters drastically overestimated it's ability.

Djekar
28-01-2009, 06:31
Well if they hadn't, there would be (even more) posts about DE's being "borken" and "ch33sy) because they had a sword that could kill Karl Franz and a Dragon in a single turn. Kind of like the Infernal Gateway debate that recently sputtered out.

~Biscuits

Shamfrit
28-01-2009, 06:43
On the other hand, it means Assassins can OHKO virtually anything in the game.

Favourite kill so far was Steed of Shadows cast on Assassin, flying across the battlefield, and landing, to OHKO a Giant and Overrun into another one :skull:

Fluke? Probably, but rolling a Toughness test on two dice?!

Neckutter
28-01-2009, 06:49
an assassin killing a giant? sounds balanced to me!

did you kill a slaanesh giant? because then you get bonus points.

Nekrodamus
28-01-2009, 08:17
Allthough the Giant looks like the perfect victim for the Venom Sword (no saves, T5 only), I would prefer 5-7 poisoned S6 attacks (and a backup unit) to be able to manage other stuff too.

nosferatu1001
28-01-2009, 11:38
Given that both the assasin and giant have ASF, and the giant is I3...its no more of an achievement really!

Assassins dice off against KoS, and thats about it :)

Draconian77
28-01-2009, 15:14
Well, I tend not to tool my Assassins up for hurting Giants, seeing as how they tend to die if you look at them with any sort of ranged wapon...or any sort of combat unit...or a magic missile...

I have to say, Giants could really do with another 2 wounds or so...

Neckutter
28-01-2009, 17:29
giants are really good. alot of units that have S3T3 cant deal with a giant, and sit there and die eventually. plus the whole stubborn thing is amazing.

Draconian77
28-01-2009, 17:57
We are having completely different experiences then...

S3 is more than enough to deal with Giants around here. Although it does come in 2x shot form. :p

EvC
28-01-2009, 18:04
Hell a unit of gnoblars will do one in usually!

Nekrodamus
28-01-2009, 18:06
Sorry for OT but I can't resist to tell you. ;)

On a tourney last year I played with Lizzies vs. Greenskins. Instead of doing nothing a unit of ten Skinks with blowpipes shot a Giant and managed to roll five sixes. Thought that was worth to spent both Amul dice and got another six. :) (The falling Giant then smashed a Terradon and a Snotbase in a CC nearby.)

Neckutter
28-01-2009, 18:07
wouldnt that be embarassing. the giant would never live that one down with his giant friends.
"wait, tell me how big those gnoblars were again, dude. hahahaha"


and more OT, my ghouls usually dont have trouble with giants. one game, with a really good friend had his OnG giant charge my ghouls(he used the waaagh spell) who had "always strike first" on them with a corpse cart. i had a ghast and 3 ghouls rolling to hit, 9 attacks, and i rolled 6 sixes. he was kind sad, until his giant fell on my vampire in the unit and do a wound to him at least.

Lord Dan
28-01-2009, 19:18
Honestly, anything with poison shouldn't have much trouble with a giant. It's strength is irrelevant.

Draconian77
28-01-2009, 19:50
Yes, I don't know where all these poison references are coming from...

2x multiple shot = Rxbow, not blowpipes!

Giants complete lack of anything resembling armour just makes them a tad vulrenable, I normally see players hiding their Giants until some of the enemy shooting/magic has been dealt with, which is a little sad really.

nosferatu1001
28-01-2009, 21:00
Eh? Blowpipes are 2x multiple shots, and are skirmisihng M6....

Lord Dan
28-01-2009, 21:53
...with poison.

EvC
28-01-2009, 21:57
Sorry for OT but I can't resist to tell you. ;)

On a tourney last year I played with Lizzies vs. Greenskins. Instead of doing nothing a unit of ten Skinks with blowpipes shot a Giant and managed to roll five sixes. Thought that was worth to spent both Amul dice and got another six. :) (The falling Giant then smashed a Terradon and a Snotbase in a CC nearby.)

I can beat that easily. Against the new Lizardmen, my Slaanesh Giant rumbled through the enemy lines, putting itself firmly in front of the Saurus Cavalry. 6 Skinks moved over, put 5 wounds on the Giant. The Giant then charged the cav, I got the result of "Pick up..." so one enemy got to make one attack. Which, of course, hit, wounded and killed him. Then he fell right on my nearby Marauder Horsemen.

My dice are quite legendary, for good reason ;) (In the rematch, Chameleon Skinks killed my Black Coach... in close combat)

Lord Dan
28-01-2009, 22:02
In the rematch, Chameleon Skinks killed my Black Coach... in close combat

What made him charge in the first place? Sure, it worked out for him, but that was basically a suicide charge.

EvC
28-01-2009, 22:13
The Coach was down to one wound ;) 4 attacks, 4+ to hit, 6 to wound then a set of 3+/4+ saves. That's the kind of thing that will only ever work against me.

Draconian77
28-01-2009, 22:29
Eh? Blowpipes are 2x multiple shots, and are skirmisihng M6....

Sigh...I meant that I was talking about RxB's, not that Blowpipes aren't multiple shot.

Necromancy Black
28-01-2009, 22:30
I love poison attacks. In a single round of shooting I've had..

- 10 Skinks with javalins roll five 6's on charging harpies, whiping the unit out.
- 10 Skinks with javalins whipe out an un wounded corpse cart
- prevented a few Giants from ever reaching combat
- whipe out a couple of Bolt Thrower crews in a single turn

Multiple poison hits just seem to always bring those dice odds up for me. I wish everything in the Lizardmen army had poison attacks!

Lord Dan
28-01-2009, 22:39
I wish everything in the Lizardmen army had poison attacks!

I'll bet you do.

Draconian77
28-01-2009, 23:16
Heh, does anyone else remember when the DE book was still up in the air a mention of RxB's being poisoned was made. If that had come true the term "Druchii gun line" would have been one of the most hated things in WHFB.

As it stands it just "Druchii".

You just can't win...

Lord Dan
29-01-2009, 00:01
With the rate things are going everything should just have immune to psychology, poison, and ASF. That way we skip the whole middle portion of updating armies one at a time and go right to the end result.

Draconian77
29-01-2009, 00:34
So would Daemons win out due to 5+ wards or would the Dark Elves win out due to Hatred?

How exactly does one add poison to a "Fireball" anyhow? :angel:

Lord Dan
29-01-2009, 00:39
So would Daemons win out due to 5+ wards or would the Dark Elves win out due to Hatred?

How exactly does one add poison to a "Fireball" anyhow? :angel:

Daemons.

Make it have killing blow instead.

Draconian77
29-01-2009, 00:48
Done and done!

GW, we just saved you years of laborious playtesting(chuckle...), please shower us in riches and proceed to creating your new game, Warhammer Fantasy Checkers.

Too much?

Lord Dan
29-01-2009, 00:49
No, no. That was spot on.

Draconian77
29-01-2009, 00:53
I don't know how to put this, but it just *felt* right. :rolleyes:


Back on topic(ish): How do DE players feel about not being able to chuck dice at spells that they have no chance of casting?

I have to say, I couldn't care any less. I haven't taken a single wound from the Power of Darkness spell to date...but does it make sense to disallow it? Hmm...

blueon462
29-01-2009, 00:56
Its totally game breaking...we are now barely a step above beasts of chaos.

Lord Dan
29-01-2009, 00:57
If they want to waste powerdice instead of thinking things out and allocating dice to ensure they have a chance to successfully cast the spell, then fine.

Draconian77
29-01-2009, 00:58
Yup, I figured nobody cared, but I did manage to get us back on topic.

"Woot"

Necromancy Black
29-01-2009, 01:23
Apart from thet single thread we had here, I've never heard any body at all amek this mistake and not use those powerdice first. Still, I can only hope for the day that it happens now witht his FAQ :p

nosferatu1001
29-01-2009, 08:38
Yh - as has been said, leaving one dice left (the only time this FAQ applies) is really poor planning - should have used it earlier, its not like you have a limit on number used to cast!

As an opponent I normally scroll / dispel normally PoD anyway.

Condottiere
29-01-2009, 10:48
Dispel dice maybe, I wouldn't waste a scroll on it.

chivalrous
29-01-2009, 11:53
Yh - as has been said, leaving one dice left (the only time this FAQ applies) is really poor planning - should have used it earlier, its not like you have a limit on number used to cast!


What happens if you miscast on your first spell after Power of Darkness though?
If you're lucky and roll up 4 extra power dice, use two for your first spell and that, unluckily, miscasts then you've still got two left over. It's not daft or stupid or poor planning, it's just bad luck.
If you're trying to eat through an opponent's scrolls and dispel pool before letting off the really devastating spells? Why waste 4 dice on a spell that you only need 2 for?

nosferatu1001
29-01-2009, 12:01
As i've said - these are all luck events that may happen. I have however not seen this happen at all so far, as its often better to go for IF with more dice, or make him burn DS through high castings. This is having played about 35ish games against the new DE, one with 4 mages.

Condottiere
29-01-2009, 12:38
What happens if you miscast on your first spell after Power of Darkness though?
If you're lucky and roll up 4 extra power dice, use two for your first spell and that, unluckily, miscasts then you've still got two left over. It's not daft or stupid or poor planning, it's just bad luck.
If you're trying to eat through an opponent's scrolls and dispel pool before letting off the really devastating spells? Why waste 4 dice on a spell that you only need 2 for?I think you have to pace yourself, in order to avoid or minimize events that can turn out to be fatal. If you can afford to risk that spellcaster, then it's a tactical decision.

sulla
30-01-2009, 03:51
Back on topic(ish): How do DE players feel about not being able to chuck dice at spells that they have no chance of casting?


As long as you have 2 dice, you can potentially cast any spell in any lore (I.Force) so it is only a problem for idiots who can't count and have a single dice left. I usually end up throwing all my PoD dice at a single spell anyway.