PDA

View Full Version : Roiling skies from lore of heavens



Redman120185
22-07-2010, 06:47
So the lore attricbute is worded so that if a enemy flyer is targeted by a spell of heaven it suffers D6 strength 4 hits. Does this mean all I have to do is pick any spell throw one dice at and it won't matter if it is dispelled because I targeted the flyer? It seems pretty evil against flyers.

Ultimate Life Form
22-07-2010, 06:57
RAW yes. It also doesn't matter if you meet casting value.

Kalandros
22-07-2010, 07:01
.. I'll play it that when the spell is successfully cast on a targeted flier, it will cause d6 S4 hits

Redman120185
22-07-2010, 07:09
Yeh, but or other lore abilities it specifically states successfully cast, this one says targeted

Ayin
26-07-2010, 18:42
So, does anyone have a good, rules supported argument for why this wouldn't work? I am very interested to know.

The attribute says that a unit 'targeted' by a spell from the lore of heavens suffers d6 S4 hits, does this mean the unit suffers the effects if:

1. the casting value of the spell is not met?
2. The spell is dispelled?

ColShaw
26-07-2010, 18:48
It sure seems to me that a spell has no effects whatsoever if it's dispelled. But I doubt if that will satisfy some of the folks here.

Ayin
26-07-2010, 18:53
Indeed, the spell has no effect when dispelled, but this is the Lore Attribute, and it takes effect when the unit is targeted.

To my understanding, the process works like this.

1. Select a spell
2. Choose a target, roll power dice.
3. Roll dispell.
4. Apply spell effects, if any.

Now, it would seem the Lore attribute, requiring the unit be targeted, would take effect at step 2. Since this happens before the attempt at dispell, does it matter if the spell is dispelled?

Can someone point out where I am wrong?

Ultimate Life Form
26-07-2010, 18:53
It sure seems to me that a spell has no effects whatsoever if it's dispelled. But I doubt if that will satisfy some of the folks here.

You're rightly doubtful because if you read the rules the targetting part occurs before any dice are rolled and therefore has been completed once the spell has been announced, RAW triggering Roiling Skies.

Queue obligatory endless unwanted posts about spirit of the game, logic, powergaming, bad sportsmanship, most important rule etc. It's not gonna change anything written in the rules.

Haravikk
26-07-2010, 19:20
Well the attribute says "in addition to any other effects caused by the spell" which sort of implies that the spell has to have an effect for the attribute to be in addition of, which requires the spell to be cast successfully.

It's a very weak argument, but I think it implies some intent that the spell must be successful, though as it is currently the rule definitely doesn't say it very well if that is what was intended.

Ayin
26-07-2010, 19:33
So when exactly would you propose the Lore Attribute takes place? Should it occur when the unit is targeted, as it says in the description? And if so, how do you erase the effects of the Lore Attribute if the spell is then later dispelled?

Or should you choose another time for the Lore Attribute to take effect? If you choose a different time then you are instructed to, what would be a good choice? after dispel but before spell effects? After spell effects? The end of the magic phase?

knauden
26-07-2010, 19:37
After the spell has been successfully cast and that spells effects have been allocated then you add the d6 str 4

Ultimate Life Form
26-07-2010, 19:38
Well the attribute says "in addition to any other effects caused by the spell" which sort of implies that the spell has to have an effect for the attribute to be in addition of


Actually it means only that Roiling Skies is in addition to whatever the spell might (or might not) do otherwise.

Haravikk
26-07-2010, 22:00
Actually it means only that Roiling Skies is in addition to whatever the spell might (or might not) do otherwise.

Well I mean it's silly overall, but:


4. Spell Resolution
Assuming the spell has been cast and not dispelled, its effect is now applied.

I mean it's all very tenuous at best with the current wording of the lore attribute, but you could argue that "in addition to any other effects caused by the spell" simply can't kick in if no spell occurs, as the spell resolution step doesn't happen, and no effect of any kind is produced.
The "in addition to any other effects" implies that an effect is expected to have occurred before the roiling skies damage is applied, which won't happen if the spell fails.

hlaine larkin
26-07-2010, 22:16
Lets call it as 'is anyone going to be enough of a pedantic idiot and actually use the rules as written', i feel the intent is obvious-as if the spell doesnt work, nothing has happened.

i think we can apply the generic rule of 'don't be a dick'

Ayin
26-07-2010, 22:28
Well, when I first read the lore description, imagined the fluff and read the rules, to me it seemed fairly obvious that it would just work the way it is described, that just by tapping into the lore of heavens the skies darken and become dangerous. I have always played in a very friendly manner, and have never, to the best of my memory, tried to use poor wording or a bad ruling to my advantage.

So I think your generic rule of 'don't be a dick' is pretty retarded. I also think that deciding that anyone who thought it works that way is an idiot is, well, idiotic, and not to get all 'internet tough guy' on you, but if all you are going to add to this conversation is that YOU can clearly see how it was INTENDED to work and then disparage anyone who disagrees with that interpretation, well then, it doesn't really seem like you add anything at all.

Haravikk
26-07-2010, 22:40
So I think your generic rule of 'don't be a dick' is pretty retarded. I also think that deciding that anyone who thought it works that way is an idiot is, well, idiotic, and not to get all 'internet tough guy' on you, but if all you are going to add to this conversation is that YOU can clearly see how it was INTENDED to work and then disparage anyone who disagrees with that interpretation, well then, it doesn't really seem like you add anything at all.
Well said. I don't think anyone needs to come down hard on either side, I'm not really arguing seriously that the current attribute is saying this bonus only applies after a spell is cast, just pointing out how it can be interpreted that way and why it might indicate that's how it's supposed to be.

Now, I'm not too biased in this as a Dwarf player as I neither get to use the Lore of Heavens, nor am I affected by its attribute as I don't have a Gyrocopter, but it's interesting how strangely word the attribute is, as the wording doesn't seem entirely consistent.

Phoenix Puzzle
27-07-2010, 00:25
I just normaly play it as if it gets dispelled, then no further effect. thats the easiest way to assume. If the rule gets disputed in-game, then just d6 it. :D

Ayin
27-07-2010, 01:19
That's cool, and that is exactly what I do when something comes up that is too close to call, or unexpected, but as far as rules are concerned, I like to do things correctly, not one way for half the games, the other for the rest.

Paraelix
27-07-2010, 02:19
Actually it means only that Roiling Skies is in addition to whatever the spell might (or might not) do otherwise.

For once our opinions appear to run contrary to each other. I do not believe it has any effect unless the spell goes off.

RichBlake
27-07-2010, 02:55
To be honest even if this were the case I doubt it would matter much:

1) It only effects flyers
2) If a spell fails to meet the casting value that wizard cannot cast any spells further (so it can't target anyone else).

Therefore the only way to REALLY abuse this is if you have like 10 level 1 wizards and claim to do 10D6 S4 hits to a flyer unit.

I'm impartial on the whole thing, I personally would side with the RAW argument, for all we know the designers may have meant it to be such to boost arguably the weakest of the three bonus effects.

Phoenix Puzzle
27-07-2010, 03:01
I'm impartial on the whole thing, I personally would side with the RAW argument, for all we know the designers may have meant it to be such to boost arguably the weakest of the three bonus effects.

If the RAW means what it means, wouldn't they say something in parenthesis about it? like "(regardless if the spell is successfully cast)"

shakedown47
27-07-2010, 04:25
I'll throw in with the camp that supports RAW. As Ayin said, I imagine the process of the wizard summoning the power for the spell to disturb the air around the target. Also let's face it, the Lore Attribute is strong against the units you probably wouldn't be targeting with a Heavens spell anyways, such as furies, harpies, bats and the like. It's a nice damage bonus against the unarmored flyers, and it might put an extra wound on a dragon. Play it RAW and not only will you never need to have an argument about it, but it won't really ever seem overpowered.

Arkh
27-07-2010, 04:39
I think the intended version of the lore attribute is to not take effect unless the spell is successfully cast.

On a random side note... I just bought the cards for magic and I am more than a little pissed to find out that they are not numbered for each lore... Huge ass cards with plenty of space... GW couldn't find the space to number them 0-6. Other than that they are beautifully made.

Phoenix Puzzle
27-07-2010, 06:06
On a random side note... I just bought the cards for magic and I am more than a little pissed to find out that they are not numbered for each lore... Huge ass cards with plenty of space... GW couldn't find the space to number them 0-6. Other than that they are beautifully made.


OMG im glad somebody other than me noticed! (was equally pissed) now i need to stencil the darn number on each card. argh!.

but yes, you make a good point. its not really overpowered anyway. Doing it RAW is easier :D

Redman120185
27-07-2010, 07:12
The main reason I posted this was the wording of the attribute. The others that do damage say succesfully cast. The only other one that says targeted is lore of beasts, so I ask if you don't want heavens to work doest that mean the lore of beasts won't work either.

Haravikk
27-07-2010, 10:11
OMG im glad somebody other than me noticed! (was equally pissed) now i need to stencil the darn number on each card. argh!.

but yes, you make a good point. its not really overpowered anyway. Doing it RAW is easier :D
They also made a spelling mistake for the Lore of Death attribute on the Purple Sun of Xereus, because I have no idea what a "power dice poolp" is :)
But yeah they're really nice cards, if you keep them in the right order then you can line them up and roll a dice that way at least, it just means you have to be careful when you put them back to be sure they're in the right order. But I always have a rulebook handy anyway so it's not usually a big deal, it just saves time and space when looking up spells which is great.

Ayin
27-07-2010, 13:22
2) If a spell fails to meet the casting value that wizard cannot cast any spells further (so it can't target anyone else).



However, if an enemy wizard dispelled the spell, then the Heavens wizard is still free to cast others. Additionally, if this works RAW, then even though the spell was dispelled, the Attribute takes effect.



Also, the lack of numbers on those spell cards is just ridiculous! Honestly, if I were to get a set, I would just write the numbers on them somewhere, though i would hate to mess them up, as they are so pretty...

Greyfire
27-07-2010, 15:44
Also, the lack of numbers on those spell cards is just ridiculous! Honestly, if I were to get a set, I would just write the numbers on them somewhere, though i would hate to mess them up, as they are so pretty...
Agreed. But when I set my wayback machine for "Warhammer Magic" I seem to remember that the spell cards there were shuffled and dealt out. Maybe that's what the design was like originally and they added the dice mechanic back? Random shuffling would still work if it wasn't for the rule about rolling doubles means select a spell. I'd love to understand why they didn't put the numbers on the bottom of the card. Nothing I can't fix with a silver sharpie tho'. :)

Damocles8
27-07-2010, 15:51
Well judging from the FAQ's and their answers to the SiN and Steadfast, Purple Sun, and a few others....I'd say we might want to lean towards the RAI arguments....

ChrisIronBrow
27-07-2010, 17:51
Well judging from the FAQ's and their answers to the SiN and Steadfast, Purple Sun, and a few others....I'd say we might want to lean towards the RAI arguments....

The problem with trying that, is that we have no idea what was "intended". GW does stupid things all the time, it's just guess work and personal preference if we deduce their "intent". Ultimatley the only fair way of interpretting the rules is RAW, if those rules don't make sense or don't work, we can houserule them, but the rules of a game are the rules of a game.

Damocles8
27-07-2010, 18:14
The problem with trying that, is that we have no idea what was "intended". GW does stupid things all the time, it's just guess work and personal preference if we deduce their "intent". Ultimatley the only fair way of interpretting the rules is RAW, if those rules don't make sense or don't work, we can houserule them, but the rules of a game are the rules of a game.

I disagree with your assessment. They used common sense (which isn't so common anyway) to rule the FAQ, so we should use common sense (or try) in game we play.

ChrisIronBrow
27-07-2010, 18:30
I disagree with your assessment. They used common sense (which isn't so common anyway) to rule the FAQ, so we should use common sense (or try) in game we play.

The problem with "common" sense, is that everyone has a different opinion.
Ultimately opinions are irrelevant when it comes to the rules. Because I hate arguing about rules, I refuse to "interpret" them. They say what they say.

Ayin
27-07-2010, 19:16
We have no idea what was 'intended', that is just guessing, tainted by personal preference. The only information we have to work with is the actual wording of rules. Hopefully this will come to the attention of someone at GW, and the next iteration of the Rulebook FAQ will include the answere.

Additionally, 'common sense' is a terrible argument, in any situation. 'Common Sense' is culturally dependent, and often contradictory in nature. Without getting to into it, the old adages 'birds of a feather flock together' and 'opposites attract' are both referenced as common sense sayings, but obviously both cannot be true. 'Common Sense' is entirely circumstantial, and holds zero merit in logical discussion or debate.

T10
27-07-2010, 19:32
I've got a pretty good idea of what's intended: All the other Lores Attributes are dependent on a successful casting of a spell. Except the Lore of Beasts: this lowers the casting value when targeted at certain troop types.

Certainly, none of them hand the players "free candy".

-T10

Ayin
27-07-2010, 19:36
So, your argument is that, since all the other lores are worded one way, and this one is worded differently, then clearly this one works the same as those?

Nighthawke
27-07-2010, 19:43
no what people are arguing is that if you dont nitpick and use common sence then youll inderstand. if you try the things that come up on this website in a store/ gaming club they would laugh and say no .

Ayin
27-07-2010, 19:47
Hm, never been laughed at in a club or store. Normally intelligent discussion ensues. Additionally, I wasn't influenced in this instance by the opinion of this website, or any other source, since this was simply how the rulebook described the working of this Lore Attribute. I only came on because I saw a thread about it, and was interested to see if anyone had a solid, logical argument as to why it would not work like that.

Also, I realize that everyone likes to throw around 'common sense', as it is a culturally common term, but really, if you have the time and inclination, it is very much worth the time to look into the concept, and why it is so flawed.

T10
27-07-2010, 19:48
So, your argument is that, since all the other lores are worded one way, and this one is worded differently, then clearly this one works the same as those?

No, my argument is that you're free to choose: Either play it that pointing a finger at the target flying unit deals a free batch of hits at no cost or risk, or that it is a bonus effect that comes into play once you've successfully cast your spell.

I've picked one and I won't kick up a fuss if you pick the other. You'll have to suffer the knowledge that T10 thinks you're doing it wrong, though. :)

-T10

Ayin
27-07-2010, 20:03
Indeed.

Can I ask you what in the Lore Attribute description lead you to 'pick' that it works that way?

Ayin
27-07-2010, 20:05
Indeed.

Can I ask you what in the Lore Attribute description lead you to 'pick' that it works that way?

T10
27-07-2010, 20:15
Yes, the part where it said to me: "You're going to play this game with your friends and this **** ain't gonna fly!"

-T10

Haravikk
27-07-2010, 20:31
Can I ask you what in the Lore Attribute description lead you to 'pick' that it works that way?
I'm inclined to side with T10 on this after saying my piece to much the same effect earlier; while this attribute may seem less powerful compared to other lores attributes, having it without the prerequisite of successfully casting a spell seems unnecessarily damaging for flyers, so I think for the fun of the game it's better to go with requiring a spell to succeed before extra damage is dished out.

If you look at the wording of the attribute, it does seem to suggest that the damage is in addition to the effects of the spell, of which there are none at all if the spell isn't cast successfully, so arguably the spell resolution step (in which effects and thus additional effects are determined) is skipped.

Phoenix Puzzle
27-07-2010, 21:29
An option to do is, before the battle, discuss with the opponent that particular problem. See if you both can settle on temporary house rules for that battle. There, problem solved. its better to let your opponent know your opinion on it before hand rather than spend an hour searching through rules during turn 2 or 3, right?

itcamefromthedeep
27-07-2010, 21:51
I'll admit a bias on the side of not wanting this to work when the spell fails.

---

The Lore Attributes description on page 494 of the big book says that lore attributes are "a grouping of one or more special rules that are applied to certain spells from that lore."

This tells me that lore attributes modify the spell. Since it modifies the effect of the spell, if the spell fails than so does the lore attribute.

Redman120185
28-07-2010, 05:57
No, my argument is that you're free to choose: Either play it that pointing a finger at the target flying unit deals a free batch of hits at no cost or risk, or that it is a bonus effect that comes into play once you've successfully cast your spell.

I've picked one and I won't kick up a fuss if you pick the other. You'll have to suffer the knowledge that T10 thinks you're doing it wrong, though. :)

-T10

So know we are deciding from 2 different ways to play a rule and saying that it is ok. Not a strong argument. If you don't want it to work that way you would need some sort of reasoning besides "I don't like that" because as written it sounds like it works the other way. Also by your logic one could claim that the lore of beasts is useless. That's where my reasoning for it working by targeting. Do you have any actual reasoning?

EDMM
28-07-2010, 06:29
Lore of fire would be equally useless. Substitute "cast at" for "targeted."

I would say that it seems to me that three of the lore's have abilities that take effect whether the spell is successful or not. Beasts, fire and heavens.

They could have worded heavens lore attribute like light, they did not do so. They worded it like beasts. It seems pretty clear to me. Targeted is targeted.

Redman120185
28-07-2010, 06:59
Didnt even realize About the fire ability. So it's either play the rule as written or totally ignore almost half of the lore abilities because you don't want a precious unit with wings to have the ability to maybe get hurt.

Haravikk
28-07-2010, 15:21
Agreed. But when I set my wayback machine for "Warhammer Magic" I seem to remember that the spell cards there were shuffled and dealt out. Maybe that's what the design was like originally and they added the dice mechanic back? Random shuffling would still work if it wasn't for the rule about rolling doubles means select a spell. I'd love to understand why they didn't put the numbers on the bottom of the card. Nothing I can't fix with a silver sharpie tho'. :)
Sorry for the off-topic, but I just wanted to point out I played a couple of games with the battle magic cards, and the missing numbers aren't a big deal, we just spread out the lore on the table (except the signature card) and just rolled 1 for left and 6 for right; it doesn't really matter if the numbers are the right way around I think unless you have a rule that affects the result?

Romulus68
28-07-2010, 17:28
I think the intended version of the lore attribute is to not take effect unless the spell is successfully cast.

On a random side note... I just bought the cards for magic and I am more than a little pissed to find out that they are not numbered for each lore... Huge ass cards with plenty of space... GW couldn't find the space to number them 0-6. Other than that they are beautifully made.

I had the same exact rant! :D

Palantir
28-07-2010, 18:53
It's obvious that it's meant to supplement a successfully cast spell. Anyone who thinks otherwise are just getting themselves all giddy at the thought of slamming rules-abuse in the face of their most hated opponents, cackling maniacally.

Redman120185
28-07-2010, 22:32
So what your saying is the lore of beasts is useless because to be successfully cast the effect if reducing the spell cost us pointless.

dooombot
29-07-2010, 01:35
In the newest WHite Dwarf there is an article on the new Lores of Magic, with a sidebar for each Lore. In multiple instances they speak of the Heavens attribute as happening "when you TARGET" a Flyer, and how this is a boon for the Lore. It seemed pretty clear, to me, that they do in fact want it to work exactly as written, (ie. you just have to TARGET the Flyer/unit of Flyers, and the Roiling Skies happens whether the spell is cast or not.)

Now before I read it today, I was firmly in the "Only when successfully cast" camp, but now I can't say that I am. It makes sense to me, it gives Heaven a pretty useful boost. I don't think it's game breaking. So now my group will be playing it RAW.

Haravikk
29-07-2010, 11:07
So what your saying is the lore of beasts is useless because to be successfully cast the effect if reducing the spell cost us pointless.
I don't think that anyone's saying that similarly worded attributes are likely to be wrong as well; in the case of the Lore of Beasts it's pretty clear that the attribute applies before the spell is cast, as otherwise it wouldn't do anything.

With Roiling Skies it's a bit more ambiguous, as the first part suggests it happens either way, while the second suggests it might only occur if the spell is cast successfully, and common sense would usually suggest as much as well in which case GW are usually good enough to reinforce what exactly should happen. Both cases are valid, with one being fairly abusable against an army which relies on flyers for anything.

Until it's FAQed Roiling Skies is either an agree or roll-off case I think, I'm still inclined to believe it requires spell success, but we don't really know for sure. Lore of Beasts however is fine, as it's nice and unambiguous.

EDMM
29-07-2010, 15:50
I do not see any ambiguity in Heavens that is not present in Beasts and, substantially, in Fire. They all use very similar language, and I would apply the same reasoning to each.

Greyfire
29-07-2010, 17:08
In the newest White Dwarf...
That was probably written before the rule book went to press. I would expect the wording to be exactly the same. I tend to trust you guys a lot more than what's published in WD these days.

Haravikk
29-07-2010, 20:50
I do not see any ambiguity in Heavens that is not present in Beasts and, substantially, in Fire. They all use very similar language, and I would apply the same reasoning to each.
Then you're not looking.

Lore of Beast's attribute states that if a target is a beast, then the casting value is reduced by one; it's not ambiguous at all as you choose the target before you cast the spell, when you roll for it the value you need is reduced by one.

Lore of Fire's attribute states that if a spell is cast at a unit that has been hit previously by another lore of fire spell, then wizard adds +D3 to his casting total. Again it's not ambiguous as when you pick the unit, you can easily figure out if the attribute applies, then when you roll the power dice you roll an extra D3 and add it to the result (it isn't an extra dice though, so a natural roll of less than 3 still fails).

Lore of Heaven's attribute however states that when a flying unit is targeted by a spell, it will suffer extra damage in addition to any effect from the spell. This is ambiguous because a spell can't have an effect for the damage to be in addition to if the spell isn't successful, which implies the spell must cast in order for the attribute to apply, as the spell resolution step (when the damage is presumably calculated) never occurs. But the wording likewise can be interpreted to simply mean that by targeting the flyer you incur the extra damage. The first and second parts of the attribute don't seem to follow logically, and no clarification is given.

EDMM
29-07-2010, 21:21
It still reads exactly the same. "No effect" is included in "any effect."

After all, if you successfully cast the spell, and then failed to inflict any wounds with the regular hits of the spell, that would be the exact same "effect" as if you failed to cast the spell. In my opinion, you would get the extra hits in both cases. "Any effect" is simply too broad to allow any other interpretation.