PDA

View Full Version : New MR Rules and Wind of Undeath, better?



Caine Mangakahia
05-02-2009, 23:52
Well I played a 2K game with my VC vs DE, and as per usual I didn't roll Vanhels on a single one of my Vampires (I had one necromancer with the spell and the book of Arkhan, which burnt out on turn 2).
My opponant shut down any attempt to cast Vanhels with his single scroll caddy wizard, and casually let my corpse cart/AWSF and hero invocations go (neither of which did much).
My Army Included a level 3 VC Wizard/Fighter guy who managed to roll all of the ranged attack spells. Normally due to the risk of the Ring of Hotek and the presence of a Cauldron/Nullstones, my ranged spells would be replaced by spamvocations of nehek *yawn*.
But after a moments deliberation and some daring on my part, I decided to throw dice at Wind of Undeath.
Well, under the new rules it seems MR has no effect on spells with no direct target, and neither does the Ring of Hotek unless the caster is actually within 12 of it.
FOUR times I cast the spell in that game.
Now I got really lucky not to miscast, and the damage was a mixed bag of luck.In the course of the game I killed the crew of one of his two Hydras, causing it to Whimper, and snuck a wound off his Pendant of Khaleth Lord and the Dragon he was riding as well. I forgot to cause the hits on his wizard (whom I didn't notice in the trees for most of the game)The Spirit hosts that were produced tended to get smited by his lord fairly quickly but did save my bacon in the end (and managed to cause an additional wound on the Lord as well!).
It was really nice to have a non Necromantic spell that I cast more than once in the game , and seemed better to throw a lot of dice at one spell with oomph! than lots of smelly dice at invocation and vanhels (which everyone complains about).
In the end I pulled out a hard earned draw (DE are a real bugbear IMO) and the spell didn't cause untold damage on his units and he handled the Spirit hosts fairly effectively, so it doesn't seem overpowered. Also many other spells will work ths way now (Comet already did, arnzipals, Cleansing flare and the Prb of thunder will too).
On a side note does this contradict the old TK FAQ about how MR works with the CAsket of Souls? As the new FAQ contradicts many old faq's (and a few rule books) and is more current, does it replace them?

dooombot
06-02-2009, 01:09
my group plays according to the newest FAQ, which makes me :D i think its stupid that just because one guy/unit has MR it would stop the casket from affecting everyone else.

theunwantedbeing
06-02-2009, 01:13
I personally prefer the old way of doing it.
Simply as anyone who uses that spell seems to get a 4+ 9/10 times.

The Red Scourge
06-02-2009, 08:50
Well, under the new rules it seems MR has no effect on spells with no direct target, and neither does the Ring of Hotek unless the caster is actually within 12 of it.

No it doesn't:


‘The number in the brackets indicates the
maximum number of extra dice that may be rolled
when trying to dispel each spell that is targeted
against the magically resistant unit.’


Roll a D6 for every enemy unit on the table

The spell targets enemy units, so MR will kick in. The wording of MR is not 'that solely targets the MR unit'.

What the errata does say is that MR has no effect on spells such as The Comet of Cassandora, which targets a point on the table top, or The Howler Wind that targets a general area.

This is my interpretation at least – and yes, I do play VC :p

Caine Mangakahia
06-02-2009, 09:07
THe new DE errata would indicate otherwise.



GW DE Erratta
Do area of effect spells such as Wind of
Undeath miscast on a double if they affect any
model within 12" of the Ring of Hotek? And
how about spells that do not specify a target
location until after they have been
successfully cast?
A. Neither of these are affected by the Ring of
Hotek, as such spells are not ‘targeted’ at any
specific point before being cast

The spell doesn't actually target a unit, but does affect units on the field. Note that the rules for MR apply to units that are TARGETED by a spell.

The Red Scourge
06-02-2009, 09:33
Hmm... Interesting... :)

I'll be looking forward to the day, GW publishes a dictionary along with their FAQs and errata :D

It would be a really nice chapter in the BRB, and I believe that it would be a really nice help for the game designers too – and especially the rules lawyers writing the FAQs.

But then again. If they sharpened up and did the rules in a sensible way, there would be no need for an 8th, 9th,.. 100th edition, and part of the fun of the game comes from loud rules arguments ;)

Ixquic
06-02-2009, 13:28
Yeah until the new DE faq, I was under the same assumption that army wide spells "targeted" the units and thus MR could be used (since that's what the Tomb Kings faq applies) but apparently that's not the case. The MR rules were very badly written in the first place but it seems like now we can pretty much assume that they meant DIRECTLY targeted at one unit.

The Red Scourge
06-02-2009, 13:47
Now how about spells with templates. Do they target, or do they not?

And what does target mean?

Take a look at the WoC Slaanesh lore for instance. None of the spells use the word target. They use similar words like pick and choose. This must mean that MR aren't usable here either, as they do not target.:wtf:

Curse that GW and their insistance on making horrible rules for an otherwise fun game :D

Ixquic
06-02-2009, 14:16
Yeah they really need to just pick a way of writing this stuff instead of trying to make it sound better by using different words. Basically for templates I would say if you are casting it onto the unit like with the Pit of Shades where it says "place it on a unit" you can use MR but stuff like Black Horror where you are picking a point on the battle field you don't.

Caine Mangakahia
06-02-2009, 20:18
Now how about spells with templates. Do they target, or do they not?

And what does target mean?

Take a look at the WoC Slaanesh lore for instance. None of the spells use the word target. They use similar words like pick and choose. This must mean that MR aren't usable here either, as they do not target.:wtf:

Curse that GW and their insistance on making horrible rules for an otherwise fun game :D


LOL :)

It does meen that certain spells benefit from immunity from MR now. A lot of the template spells will fall into this catagory.
I beleive that targeting a unit would involve specifically picking a unit to cast the spell upon.
GW seem to have made a distinction between being targeted by a spell and being affected by a spell.
I guess its a question of which my opponant hates more, throwing lots of dice at a now effective wind of death or single dice at IoN.

dooombot
06-02-2009, 20:39
my friends and i have been toying wth this, i'll use the Casket of Souls in this example.

1. Casket gets off at Power Level 7
2. Enemy Unit with MR(2) rolls his free dispell dice.
3. If he beats the 7, that Unit will be unaffected by the Casket, although it still goes off and affects all his other units.

i think one of the problems with MR is that it stops the whole spell, if they cahnged it to just letting that unit 'shrug off' the effects of the spell i think it would better show a units resistance to magic. In the example above, the player could add more dispell dice to his MR roll, but then it leaves him less dice to try and stop other magic.

The Red Scourge
06-02-2009, 21:08
Toyed with a similar house rule with a fellow gamer, though we did it a little different.

1. Player 1s affect all spell goes off at X power level.
2. Player 2 tries to dispell with dispell pool dice, but falls short.
3. Player 2 then rolls the MR dice for the unit with MR and adds it to the dispell roll, if this beats X, then the MR unit goes free, but not all the others.

This seems to capture the spirit of MR, while not making it overly complicated. Its a house rule, but we find it to be both an improvement over the previous rules and the errata :)

dooombot
07-02-2009, 05:13
i like that even better

Caine Mangakahia
07-02-2009, 08:47
I have to say I also like the Idea of a MR Unit being the only one to benefit from the immunity rather than cancelling the spell altogether, its a lot more fluffy. Might involve a lot of rolling with multiple resistant units though, might be why the concept was never used.

MalusCalibur
07-02-2009, 17:05
Do people not use their common sense any more? Because this is ridiculous.
If a spell targets enemy units, then any of those who contribute Magic Resistance will be able to use it in an attempt to dispel the spell. Just imagine a unit of, lets say Flesh Hounds, being part of an army affected by Wind of Undeath:

Flesh Hound 1: 'Hey, they're casting a spell at us! Haha, fools! Our innante daemonic magical resistance will dispel it!'

Flesh Hound 2: 'Actually mate, they're not targeting us specifically and solely. Therefore our innate daemonic magical resistance switches itself off'

FH1: 'What? But that's stupid! That makes absolutely no sense when looking at this battle from a sensible, reasonable and logical angle!'

FH2: 'Exactly...'


Ok, so the example is perhaps a little frivolous in description, but the point remains. Why would the magic resistance possessed by a model or unit only work if a spell targets (hits, affects, whatever. The word used here isn't really relevant because they are all supposed to mean the same thing) them and ONLY them?

Wind of Undeath 'targets' every enemy unit. You might not cause any damage to any given unit (if you fail the 4+ roll), but this is no different to a magic missile (or similar damage spell, just for example), because even if you successfully cast it there is no guarantee of any damage actually occuring at the end. The MM (or other spell) has still affected the unit, it just hasn't had the strength to harm them.
The units are still being 'targeted' by the spell and thus any unit with MR can use it in the dispel attempt. The same goes for template spells: if the template covers or touches a unit with MR, and thus has the potential to affect them, then the MR can be used to try and dispel it.

As for the Ring of Hotek, that is a much greyer area as far as Wind of Undeath is concerned, because it could be argued that the Ring only needs to be within 12" of a friendly unit (because the spell is being targeted there, as well as everywhere else [ie all other enemy units]). However, I believe that the Ring, in this case, would need to be within 12" of the caster, simply because otherwise the spell will be affected by the Ring every single time (it seems unlikely that the holder of the Ring would ever be more than 12" away from ANY friendly units), and it seems a little harsh to be able to so reliably shut down a 12+ spell: but that is my only reasoning, and as mentioned, it could easily be argued the other way.


MalusCalibur

W0lf
07-02-2009, 17:43
Just imagine a unit of, lets say Flesh Hounds, being part of an army affected by Wind of Undeath

yes because using logic in a example where daemon dogs are talking makes perfect sense. ;)

I think GW ruling is what counts, whether your 'logic' agrees or not.

Nephilim of Sin
07-02-2009, 18:38
Do people not use their common sense any more? Because this is ridiculous.
If a spell targets enemy units, then any of those who contribute Magic Resistance will be able to use it in an attempt to dispel the spell. Just imagine a unit of, lets say Flesh Hounds, being part of an army affected by Wind of Undeath:

Flesh Hound 1: 'Hey, they're casting a spell at us! Haha, fools! Our innante daemonic magical resistance will dispel it!'

Flesh Hound 2: 'Actually mate, they're not targeting us specifically and solely. Therefore our innate daemonic magical resistance switches itself off'

FH1: 'What? But that's stupid! That makes absolutely no sense when looking at this battle from a sensible, reasonable and logical angle!'

FH2: 'Exactly...'


Ok, so the example is perhaps a little frivolous in description, but the point remains. Why would the magic resistance possessed by a model or unit only work if a spell targets (hits, affects, whatever. The word used here isn't really relevant because they are all supposed to mean the same thing) them and ONLY them?

MalusCalibur

Ever played Magic: The Gathering? It makes perfect sense when you compare it to their 'targeting' system, vs. universal spells.

Sarah S
07-02-2009, 18:43
I love the new Magic Resistance rule, even though last game I had my huge unit of Flesh Hounds get demolished every turn by alternating Cleansing Flare and Soulfire.

Magic Resistance is crap and has become too common. The errata makes magic more viable again. It also makes Warpstorm Scrolls viable against Bloodthirsters now. Something I will put to good use in a coming tournament... :)

Arnizipal
07-02-2009, 19:27
My opponant shut down any attempt to cast Vanhels with his single scroll caddy wizard, and casually let my corpse cart/AWSF and hero invocations go (neither of which did much).

Excuse my ignorance but what is a AWSF? :confused:


The Spirit hosts that were produced tended to get smited by his lord fairly quickly but did save my bacon in the end (and managed to cause an additional wound on the Lord as well!).

[snip]

In the end I pulled out a hard earned draw (DE are a real bugbear IMO) and the spell didn't cause untold damage on his units and he handled the Spirit hosts fairly effectively, so it doesn't seem overpowered. Also many other spells will work ths way now (Comet already did, arnzipals, Cleansing flare and the Prb of thunder will too).

I consider Wind of Undeath to be a pretty useless spell as the Spirit Hosts you create are easily crushed (because they're not in large units and often below starting wounds). The extra 50 victory points when they are destroyed also starts to hurt if you use the spell often.

Condottiere
08-02-2009, 02:03
Maybe change magic resistance from preventing the successful casting of a spell, to protection against its effects.

Caine Mangakahia
08-02-2009, 06:33
Excuse my ignorance but what is a AWSF? :confused:


I consider Wind of Undeath to be a pretty useless spell as the Spirit Hosts you create are easily crushed (because they're not in large units and often below starting wounds). The extra 50 victory points when they are destroyed also starts to hurt if you use the spell often.

Always Strikes first.

WoU is an awesome spell against Multiple small unit armies, you have a much greater chance of creating larger Hosts. Even if they are small, they make perfect charge misdirecters, much in the same way as the zombies created by the raise dead spell, but with the ethereal rule they are pretty durable and they will tend to have attacks back. A unit of two hosts summoned in this way held up a dragon riding DE Lord for 2 turns, a fair sacrifice IMO.

Caine Mangakahia
08-02-2009, 06:49
Do people not use their common sense any more? Because this is ridiculous.
If a spell targets enemy units, then any of those who contribute Magic Resistance will be able to use it in an attempt to dispel the spell. Just imagine a unit of, lets say Flesh Hounds, being part of an army affected by Wind of Undeath:

Flesh Hound 1: 'Hey, they're casting a spell at us! Haha, fools! Our innante daemonic magical resistance will dispel it!'

Flesh Hound 2: 'Actually mate, they're not targeting us specifically and solely. Therefore our innate daemonic magical resistance switches itself off'

FH1: 'What? But that's stupid! That makes absolutely no sense when looking at this battle from a sensible, reasonable and logical angle!'

FH2: 'Exactly...'


Ok, so the example is perhaps a little frivolous in description, but the point remains. Why would the magic resistance possessed by a model or unit only work if a spell targets (hits, affects, whatever. The word used here isn't really relevant because they are all supposed to mean the same thing) them and ONLY them?

Wind of Undeath 'targets' every enemy unit. You might not cause any damage to any given unit (if you fail the 4+ roll), but this is no different to a magic missile (or similar damage spell, just for example), because even if you successfully cast it there is no guarantee of any damage actually occuring at the end. The MM (or other spell) has still affected the unit, it just hasn't had the strength to harm them.
The units are still being 'targeted' by the spell and thus any unit with MR can use it in the dispel attempt. The same goes for template spells: if the template covers or touches a unit with MR, and thus has the potential to affect them, then the MR can be used to try and dispel it.

As for the Ring of Hotek, that is a much greyer area as far as Wind of Undeath is concerned, because it could be argued that the Ring only needs to be within 12" of a friendly unit (because the spell is being targeted there, as well as everywhere else [ie all other enemy units]). However, I believe that the Ring, in this case, would need to be within 12" of the caster, simply because otherwise the spell will be affected by the Ring every single time (it seems unlikely that the holder of the Ring would ever be more than 12" away from ANY friendly units), and it seems a little harsh to be able to so reliably shut down a 12+ spell: but that is my only reasoning, and as mentioned, it could easily be argued the other way.


MalusCalibur

You make a lot of fair points, and I understand the argument you are maing as well. But the flip side of your argument is that a unit of Pink horrors on the other end of the field would say;

PH1 Oh no the Tomb Kings are releasing their casket of souls!
ph2 Don't worry the flesh hounds are looking at it too, we're perfectly safe

GW have made the distinction that a unit has to be targeted by the spell when it is cast.
Area or field effect spells (of Which Wind of Undeath, Arzipals Black Horror, and Cleansing Flare fit into) dont fall into this catagory.
Comet of Casandora always worked in this loophole, I have no real problem with them widening it to let a few other spells from benifiting as well.Take the Empire orb of thunder for example. From the description of the item, it actually summons a storm to the field which prevents flying. A bloodthirster would be unable to fly if the spell was successfully cast, but at no point was he targeted by the spell. Would it still make sense that he, (and any other flying creature) could fly ito the teeth of a howling gale?
Hell, even a a VC player I don't much care one way or the other, if my opponant doesn't like the new way to cast WoU, i'll ask if he would prefer me to have 2 goes at casting VAnhels or 4 at IoN instead, and he can lump it.