PDA

View Full Version : magical Lances



Ender Shadowkin
19-05-2010, 17:37
Does a magical lance still convey magical attacks (as a hand weapon) in non-charging rounds of combat? I feel like I should know this..... Thanks

Atrahasis
19-05-2010, 17:44
It conveys magical attacks, but is not a hand weapon. It will continue to do so until the wielder loses his mount, at which point it evaporates.

puppetmaster24
19-05-2010, 17:44
Yes
just because you can't get the +2 strength anymore doesnt mean you stop using it. in fact you can't

Ender Shadowkin
19-05-2010, 18:24
thanks guys
!

snowywlf
20-05-2010, 21:37
Yes
just because you can't get the +2 strength anymore doesnt mean you stop using it. in fact you can't

Except for Bretonnians, but that is clearly stated in their army book. Just clarifying in case this was the army the OP was thinking about.

Milgram
20-05-2010, 22:54
also bretonnians use their magical lances after the first round of combat. what you are referring to is a bretonnian character with a magic weapon and a mundane lance. he will use the mundane lance when charging, afterwards he uses the magic weapon.

Da Crusha
21-05-2010, 00:01
also bretonnians use their magical lances after the first round of combat. what you are referring to is a bretonnian character with a magic weapon and a mundane lance. he will use the mundane lance when charging, afterwards he uses the magic weapon.

is that legal? I believe if you are carrying a magical weapon that is the only weapon you can use.

theunwantedbeing
21-05-2010, 00:16
is that legal? I believe if you are carrying a magical weapon that is the only weapon you can use.

Yes its legal.
It's a special rule for bretonnian characters.

If they are armed with a mundane lance, they must use it on the turn they charge (and will then switch back to their magical weapon in subsequent rounds) unless they carry a magical lance.

Da Crusha
21-05-2010, 00:31
Yes its legal.
It's a special rule for bretonnian characters.

If they are armed with a mundane lance, they must use it on the turn they charge (and will then switch back to their magical weapon in subsequent rounds) unless they carry a magical lance.

ohh woops, Im not familiar with brettonian specific rules.

meneroth
21-05-2010, 16:18
the trick is that brett characters have to buy the lance extra so you can use the magical weapon on the charge by just not buying the character a lance. to be honest im not sure why you would buy both in most situations.

Dutch_Digger
22-05-2010, 08:52
sword of might gives one extra strength, so starting the charge off with a +2s lance is a nice bonus. Thats if the sword of might is not allready equipped by the BsB

T10
22-05-2010, 09:41
..., at which point it evaporates.

Hmm. I don't think there's anything in the rules for weapons to mysteriously disappear. The lance would still be a valid target for the Law of Gold spell, and count as a magical item for the purpose of working out the strength bonus of the Lucky Dirk.

-T10

Paraelix
22-05-2010, 11:34
is that legal? I believe if you are carrying a magical weapon that is the only weapon you can use.

Army book overrides rulebook.

theunwantedbeing
22-05-2010, 11:41
Hmm. I don't think there's anything in the rules for weapons to mysteriously disappear. The lance would still be a valid target for the Law of Gold spell, and count as a magical item for the purpose of working out the strength bonus of the Lucky Dirk.

-T10

Indeed your still carrying it around, you simply cannot use it anymore.
In the same manner as how you cannot use your magical bow to hit ethereal stuff with..it's there, but it as no close combat rules so isnt usable.

Atrahasis
24-05-2010, 09:06
Hmm. I don't think there's anything in the rules for weapons to mysteriously disappear.

Q. If a character using a lance in close combat has
his chariot/monster mount destroyed/killed can he
continue to fight in subsequent rounds of the same
combat, as lances are ‘mounted only’?
A. If this happens, the lance effectively disappears
and the character must start using a hand weapon
(which he is assumed to carry). Note that this
happens even if the character was equipped with a
magic lance, which is now lost.

BRB FAQ Pt2

xragg
24-05-2010, 09:36
Lances "effectively" disappear, not absolutely disappear. Its still there for purposes such as law of gold or Malekith's destroyer. If I had equiped a magic lance and magic armor, had my mount die, Malekith would have a 50% chance of destroying my armor, not 100%.

Atrahasis
24-05-2010, 10:28
There is no difference between "effectively disappear" and "disappear" - the effect is the same.

The FAQ also expressly says that the lance is lost in the last sentence.

xragg
24-05-2010, 11:21
When you describe something as "effectively", you are refering to its usefulness. The function of the item disappears in this case. The item is lost from him being able to use it. You are trying to apply a FAQ to another question to a different question and ignoring adverbs. The question was whether a character can still use a lance, not if the lance still exists. GW does a poor job writing actual rules and an even worse job writing their FAQs.

Atrahasis
24-05-2010, 13:50
The lance is effectively gone. The effect is that the lance is gone. The lance is lost.

There are only so many ways I can say it, and an infinite number of ways for you to ignore what is written on the page.

xragg
24-05-2010, 19:32
"Due to the day being a holiday with almost no agenda, it was effectively a day off." --Its still a day at work.

"With a large lead, strong defense, and the 2 minute warning approaching, the game is effectively won." --Its still not a win.

"Even though some troops still were holding out, the war was effectively won." --The war isnt completely over yet.

Having "effectively" before disappears makes a world of difference on the sentence, whether you can see that or not. For all intent and purposes, the lance has no more use in the game. GW has a long history of not seeing potential interactions and that some very rare and unique uses can still apply. In their eyes, they saw no further use for the lance, stating its effectively destroyed, but not literally destroyed.

The statement stating magical lances are lost holds more value, except for 2 things: 1. The sentence is asking you to "take note" to remind you that the first statement also applies to the second statement. 2. The word lost has numerous meanings from "destroyed" to "no longer usable". Being that the sentence is an extension of the first, I use the meaning that matches the first sentence.

You can focus on the second sentence if you want by applying the "destroyed" meaning of lost. Then only magical lances are destroyed, and normal lances for some reason are still tucked into the back pocket of the character.

Accuse me of ignoring things written if you want, but you are the one ignoring words rather then offer a meaning of "effectively" that refutes what I am saying. So far, your meaning of "effectively" is, it has no meaning, the word shouldnt even exist.

papabearshane
24-05-2010, 20:23
This question seams to be one you should discuss with your gaming group/opponent before you play a game, and come up with a mutual agreement.