PDA

View Full Version : Multiple dispels of one casting



teleologica
19-07-2010, 22:05
I had assumed that it was only possible to attempt to dispel a casting once, as per 7th. However, I cannot find this in the magic section. Can anyone point out where I'm missing this? Or am I not, and it's actually possible to attempt to dispel more than once?

I know that you break concentration with a wizard if he fails to dispel; but you can still make dispel attempts with other wizards, or 'with the army'. Also, this applies to RiP spells - which as far as I can see, it only says you may attempt to dispel at any stage in a subsequent magic phase (and if a wizard fails, he cannot dispel or cast again that phase). But again, I cannot see this limited to one attempt.

Ultimate Life Form
19-07-2010, 23:07
You're apparently right. I can't find anything in the book. According to the BRB a dispel attempt can have two possible outcomes:

A) The spell is dispelled.

B) The dispel attempt has failed.

It does not say the spell is resolved, only that this particular attempt to dispel was not successful. So the question is, how many attempts to dispel a given spell does one have? Aswer: There is no answer. According to the BRB dispelling is 'a chance to prevent the spell's effects'. The rest of the section details how you make use of that chance, but does nowhere say you're limited to only one attempt.

solkan
20-07-2010, 00:18
Look on page 36, for starters. "If the enemy has failed his dispel attempt (not not even attempted one!), the spell is cast successfully ..."

Also, you might note the singular lack of any mention of "Go back and try it again" or similar language on page 35. There's also the Magic Summary on page 29, "If the spell was cast, one of the dispelling player's Wizards can now attempt to counter the spell using dispel dice." (emphasis added)

Given the evidence for only having one attempt to dispel, where's the evidence for a second try with another wizard?

"It doesn't say you can" beats "It doesn't say you can't" when the order of events is spelled out.

Foxbat
20-07-2010, 00:20
I think the relevant portion is in the bold text at the top of the left column on page 35 of the BRB “...the opposing player now has a chance to prevent...”

The rule is clear, you have “a chance” not “chances” to dispel.

teleologica
20-07-2010, 11:39
OK, I think that that probably answers the first part of my question. ie although it would have been useful to have specified only one attempt may be made, it at least implies it. The use of singulars such as "a chance", "his attempt" etc I guess leads to this reading. Sadly I don't think that solkan's view that
"It doesn't say you can" beats "It doesn't say you can't" when the order of events is spelled out. is correct.

In any case, I should make clear that I absolutely do not want to be able to dispel more than once; what I want is to have an answer based in fact as to why an opponent can't try it on me ...

The second part of the answer remains though - there is no reference to singular attempts to dispel RiPs in subsequent magic phases. It simply says the opposing player may attempt to dispel at any time in subsequent magic phases. I don't think there is even an inference to be drawn here that only one attempt can be made (other than the 'it's dumb, ofc they didn't mean that' - with which I agree, but would like some evidence ... :)).

Foxbat
20-07-2010, 12:29
The second part of the answer remains though - there is no reference to singular attempts to dispel RiPs in subsequent magic phases. It simply says the opposing player may attempt to dispel at any time in subsequent magic phases. I don't think there is even an inference to be drawn here that only one attempt can be made (other than the 'it's dumb, ofc they didn't mean that' - with which I agree, but would like some evidence ... :)).For the RiP spells the answers does seem more elusive. However, based on the RiP rule (BRB pg 36) I think the first thing we need to do is recognize when dispel opportunities arise:
(1) When cast, but only affords an opponent a single opportunity to dispel using either DD or a scroll;
(2) A player may attempt to dispel a RiP spell, not cast that phase, in an opponent’s magic phase using DD normally (in this case no scrolls can be used); and
(3) A player may attempt to dispel a RiP spell on their own subsequent magic phase using PD (again no scrolls can be used).

I would hope that we can agree the first opportunity is clear and needs no further comment. As for the second opportunity to dispel, the operative phase in the rule is “...using Dispel Dice as normal...”. I take this to mean that players are required to follow the regular dispel rules, which would mean only a single attempt after nominating the spell the dispel attempt is for. Don’t forget, as it is a normal dispel, the player can choose to attempt to dispel with their “army” and not nominate a wizard (BRB pg 35) at all.

As for the third opportunity to dispel, the wording of the rule is free of any real conditionality other than you use PD like DD in your magic phase. Here I think a case can be made for the player being able to use as many wizards as they want as each attempt requires the nomination of wizard (recall that a player can’t “nominate” the army to cast a spell, unlike in your opponent’s magic phase), replaces an attempt to cast a spell by that wizard, uses PD (I wonder if it’s 6 max. as it is your magic phase?), and if the wizard fails the attempt can’t cast anything for the rest of the phase. Given the many downsides, I can see the player using a lot of dice at the start of their magic phase (likely dispelling it) or gambling it at the end. Either way, it's likely to be only a single attempt.

teleologica
20-07-2010, 14:16
I follow your logic on the distinction between 2&3. However, I see two problems.

First, I think we are reading quite a lot into the wording of the dispel RiPs section that just isn't there, to conclude that only one attempt may be made. I accept that it is a logical reading, it's just not the only logical reading.

More problematic is the suggestion that the situation is different whether it is your own or your opponent's turn. Again, I accept your reasoning is sound, but it seems laughable that:

1. Your opponent casts, you get one attempt to dispel.
2. Your own magic phase, you can attempt to dispel as many times as you like.
3. His next phase, the RiP is still in play; you're back to one attempt to dispel.

Do you see what I mean? I just doubt that it was intended that you could apply the dispel rules differently between different turns. I guess this may have to go into the 'agree with your opponent and hope like hell they give a sensible answer in the FaQ' box.

solkan
20-07-2010, 18:07
What's so odd about being able to do more for dispelling during your own turn than during your opponent's turn?

It's normal to be able to do more things in general during your own turn.