PDA

View Full Version : fencers blades and my will be done (white dwarf)



lees mekshop
29-07-2013, 09:39
Right there's been a hell of alot of arguments and debates about if the Ws10 from fencers blades on a tomb king/prince gives your unit your in the same WS 10 or just the basis WS 5/6 with the my will be done rule


I dont really have a preference and go with current ruling of the unit gets ws6/5 not the upgraded ws10 from the fencers blades there's been no FAQ the rule which is right
but.....I was reading the latest white dwarf and in the battle report new lizzy vs the tomb kings the guy says that he gave his tomb prince the fencers blades so that the unit he's in get Ws10

With this in white dwarf played buy people who designed the rules does that mean the ws10 on fencers blades also go on the unit he's is in

Like a kind of unofficial FAQ ???



I would like peoples thoughts

Oberon
29-07-2013, 09:44
I don't get it, why would this be an issue? Fencer's blades gives the prince WS10, Prince gives his unit his WS, Prince has WS10 because of his blades, the unit has WS10 because of the prince. The logic is good and all is well.

People in WD often get things wrong (esp. with the introductory BRs because they might have been made with playtest rules still in mind or something, like the one for daemonhunters) so people will say you can't use battle reports as FAQs, but I don't think it is even needed here.

EDIT: oh there's a FAQ? And it's another of those "we meant completely the opposite thing of what we wrote"-cases like we have on the 40k side. Oh well. Better for us non-TK-players at least...

Rosstifer
29-07-2013, 09:45
From the TK FAQ -

Q:If a Tomb King has the Fencers Blades, does the My Will Be
Done special rule mean that he makes his unit Weapon Skill 10?
(p30).
A: No; use the Tomb King’s unmodified Weapon Skill of 6,
not his modified value of 10.

Seems pretty clear to me. WD guys just played it wrong, they're only human and make mistakes after all.

lees mekshop
29-07-2013, 09:57
Didnt. Know there was a. Official FAQ OK then that's sorted :-)

kefkah
29-07-2013, 10:07
Even in the ARMYBOOK, it says unmodified WS, so its not the opposite of what they wrote, its just the FAQ was needed for people who couldent see what they wrote.

Sorry for such a tone, but im finding it pretty hard that its not the complex rules that always gets wrong but the small ones cause people dont read it through clearly.

Also never bank on anything in WD Batte-Reports, they are there for show and its very casual.

barjed
29-07-2013, 11:01
The whole battle report is just shameful and full of errors. For example, a Necrosphinx kills the Carnosaur rider with a Killing Blow.

Tae
29-07-2013, 12:29
The whole battle report is just shameful and full of errors. For example, a Necrosphinx kills the Carnosaur rider with a Killing Blow.

Doesn't the Necrosphinx have HKB on 1 attack? In which case that could work on the Saurus.

But agree that HKB is not KB, so still an error (but only in typing rather than game mechanics)

Jim
29-07-2013, 12:54
The whole battle report is just shameful and full of errors. For example, a Necrosphinx kills the Carnosaur rider with a Killing Blow.

Sorry if this is dim but I thought Characters on Mounts were still able to be KB'd?

I know Monstrous Cavalry were recently FAQ'd so you couldn't KB them but was not aware of any such change to Characters (unless I've been wrong from the get go!!)

Jim

Maoriboy007
29-07-2013, 21:31
Doesn't the Necrosphinx have HKB on 1 attack? In which case that could work on the Saurus.
But agree that HKB is not KB, so still an error (but only in typing rather than game mechanics)The Necrosphinx has normal killing blow on all its attacks , and can nominate a single str 10 HKB attack as well, so he can KB the rider with the nominated attack.


I don't get it, why would this be an issue? Fencer's blades gives the prince WS10, Prince gives his unit his WS, Prince has WS10 because of his blades, the unit has WS10 because of the prince. The logic is good and all is well.
People in WD often get things wrong (esp. with the introductory BRs because they might have been made with playtest rules still in mind or something, like the one for daemonhunters) so people will say you can't use battle reports as FAQs, but I don't think it is even needed here.
EDIT: oh there's a FAQ? And it's another of those "we meant completely the opposite thing of what we wrote"-cases like we have on the 40k side. Oh well. Better for us non-TK-players at least...It works the other way too though, the King cant get his units WS raised above his unmodified WS with spells and items, but then you can't lower the units usable WS with Miasma or similar effects either...

Lord Inquisitor
29-07-2013, 22:02
It works the other way too though, the King cant get his units WS raised above his unmodified WS with spells and items, but then you can't lower the units usable WS with Miasma or similar effects either...
I'm not sure about that. It doesn't say the unit's new WS is unmodifiable, just that they use the King's unmodified WS in place of their own WS. I would have thought that this becomes their "base" WS and that can be modified further with spells or abilities just as their own WS could have been.

Consider a unit of Skeletons (WS2) with a Tomb Prince (WS5) is hit by a Miasma (-2WS).

The tomb prince's WS becomes 3. However he still passes his unmodified WS of 5 onto the unit, which are WS5 base, but under the effects of the miasma become WS3. So everyone gets WS3 as you might expect from a unit that all have WS5 minus 2.

Maoriboy007
30-07-2013, 00:48
I'm not sure about that. It doesn't say the unit's new WS is unmodifiable, just that they use the King's unmodified WS in place of their own WS. I would have thought that this becomes their "base" WS and that can be modified further with spells or abilities just as their own WS could have been.

Consider a unit of Skeletons (WS2) with a Tomb Prince (WS5) is hit by a Miasma (-2WS).

The tomb prince's WS becomes 3. However he still passes his unmodified WS of 5 onto the unit, which are WS5 base, but under the effects of the miasma become WS3. So everyone gets WS3 as you might expect from a unit that all have WS5 minus 2. :eyebrows: Sounds like a bit of a stretch of trying to have your cake and eat it too to me "sure you can have all the penalties but none of the benefits" I mean the whole fencers blades thing involves exactly the same kind of wordplay. In the same instance I would expect the unit affected by the speed of light spell to use a Tomb Princes WS of 5 rather than 10 as well.

kefkah
30-07-2013, 01:07
:eyebrows: Sounds like a bit of a stretch of trying to have your cake and eat it too to me "sure you can have all the penalties but none of the benefits" I mean the whole fencers blades thing involves exactly the same kind of wordplay. In the same instance I would expect the unit affected by the speed of light spell to use a Tomb Princes WS of 6 rather than 10 as well.

How is this having the cake and eating it? Really?.

You have the same WS as the Tomb Prince/King has on his profil. Then you have a SPELL that gives MINUS D3.

So taking the rule of any unit with the Tomb Prince/King has his unmodified WS, wich is eaither 6 or 5. Then you have a minus D3 to your WS, on the UNIT.

So even with you using the unmodified WS of the Tomb Prince/King you still have D3 minus WS cast on the unit. Not applying that is straight up cheating.

Grumpy post again, but gosh guys cant we keep the rules bickering to things that are UNCLEAR and not things that will solve itself by another go of reading each of the rules in play.

Maoriboy007
30-07-2013, 03:34
How is this having the cake and eating it? Really?.

You have the same WS as the Tomb Prince/King has on his profil. Then you have a SPELL that gives MINUS D3.

So taking the rule of any unit with the Tomb Prince/King has his unmodified WS, wich is eaither 6 or 5. Then you have a minus D3 to your WS, on the UNIT.

So even with you using the unmodified WS of the Tomb Prince/King you still have D3 minus WS cast on the unit. Not applying that is straight up cheating.

Grumpy post again, but gosh guys cant we keep the rules bickering to things that are UNCLEAR and not things that will solve itself by another go of reading each of the rules in play.The unit gets to use his unmodified WS right? regardless of whether or not the Modifacation would make it higher or lower? Using His WS -D3 sounds just as modified as a straight change to WS 10 IMO. Not grumpy, just a bit bewildered as how this doesn't sound like a double standard, Its ok to lower his WS but not to increase it?

kefkah
30-07-2013, 05:25
The unit gets to use his unmodified WS right? regardless of whether or not the Modifacation would make it higher or lower? Using His WS -D3 sounds just as modified as a straight change to WS 10 IMO. Not grumpy, just a bit bewildered as how this doesn't sound like a double standard, Its ok to lower his WS but not to increase it?

Im not wanting to sound grumpy eaither..but..reread..it..again.

From the book, and FAQ. They use his unmodified Value, always use it. As in, the stats on the profil. There is no may, they use his WS as written on his profile instead of their own.

So a Tomb King in a unit of skellies gives that unit a WS of 6. Then a opposing wizard casts miasma on them for D3 minus, and rolls a 6, so they get minus 3 WS. Now, even if the Tomb King has WS of 3, they still use his WS of 6. But they ALSO have miasma on them for Minus 3, and also get a Weapon Skill of 3.

As you see, they STILL use his unmodified WS OF 6, but a game mechanic (spell) has Hexed the WHOLE UNIT, not only the tomb king, and the hex is minus 3 ws.

NOW, were is the contradiction in this?. Reread the signature lore for shadow,reread how EVERY model in the unit is affected by a hex, and reread my will be done.

If you IGNORE the spell, then that is caught cheating. That my will be done is a counter to miasma is..well not right, neither is that the spell somehow only resolves against a single character in the unit but ignores all the other.

This is sraight up resolved by reading on how the rules work. If your arguing that the shadow SIG has no effect on any unit with a Tomb King/Prince in it i need a really good argument for it other then "thats having your cake and eating it".

Now if you want to ask for Speed of Light, thats another rules question wich isent as clearcut as getting miasma, since the wording conflicts and on a single glance it seems they will not get WS10. This is what people should do input on, not like all the other rules-question that is easily solved if you reread the rules with a clear head.

furrie
30-07-2013, 08:51
:eyebrows: Sounds like a bit of a stretch of trying to have your cake and eat it too to me "sure you can have all the penalties but none of the benefits" I mean the whole fencers blades thing involves exactly the same kind of wordplay. In the same instance I would expect the unit affected by the speed of light spell to use a Tomb Princes WS of 5 rather than 10 as well.
If you have an effect that increases the ws for the entire unit, then they use the prince/kings ws as basis and apply the modifier to that. If the effect would only effect the prince/king then the unit won't benefit from it.

Lord Inquisitor
30-07-2013, 15:28
:eyebrows: Sounds like a bit of a stretch of trying to have your cake and eat it too to me "sure you can have all the penalties but none of the benefits" I mean the whole fencers blades thing involves exactly the same kind of wordplay. In the same instance I would expect the unit affected by the speed of light spell to use a Tomb Princes WS of 5 rather than 10 as well.

Not at all, think about it if it didn't say "unmodified". Then if the unit were affected by -2 from miasma, then the prince would be reduced to 3 then the unit would use his WS of 3 and then get reduced again by -2... that would be silly. Likewise you obviously can't pass on your WS10 you get from fencer's blades. But because the unit gets to use his unmodified WS doesn't also mean that their WS is now unmodifiable.

Honestly, when we get into the subject of which order to apply modifiers, it's a bit of a grey area. Normally I run on the principle of:

Substitutions -> Multiplication/Division -> Addition/Subtraction -> Caps (not above 10 or below 1, if applicable)

WFB is a bit vague on this subject but it seems logical and similar to what 40K does.

So let's say you have a tomb prince with fencer's blades under a miasma (-2WS) in a unit of skeletons.

We do substitutions first so the prince is WS10 and the unit is WS5. Then we apply modifiers. So they're WS8 and WS3 respectively.

Maoriboy007
31-07-2013, 02:05
From the book, and FAQ. They use his unmodified Value, always use it. As in, the stats on the profil. There is no may, they use his WS as written on his profile instead of their own.Indeed in fact like I've said IMO the Speed of Light or Fences Blades will not benefit the unit because regardless they use his unmodified WS, and Miasma shouldn't apply for the exact same reasons. They will affect the Prince , who is specifically excluded from the benefits and penalties of the rule, but the unit is certainly locked into his WS.


If you IGNORE the spell, then that is caught cheating. IF another effect counteracts the effects of a spell (or anything else) then you are playing said rule correctly and not cheating at all. There are examples of this in warhammer, you cant reduce the number of attacks a giant has for example, Dark elves have a weapon that always attacks at a certain strength regardless of the opposing spell or item. Some things just counter others in warhammer, due to oversight or intention, that's just the way the game works right now, Its not all that unusual nor is this by any means the most ridiculous, so the vehemence of this statement seems a bit ridiculous.


That my will be done is a counter to miasma is..well not right, neither is that the spell somehow only resolves against a single character in the unit but ignores all the other. It is no worse than several other abilities in the game, is it right that speed of light, which modifies the WS of the whole unit, only benefits the Prince but not the skeletons? In that case its less of a benefit than it is a penalty.


This is sraight up resolved by reading on how the rules work. If your arguing that the shadow SIG has no effect on any unit with a Tomb King/Prince in it i need a really good argument for it other then "thats having your cake and eating it".If the Princes WS is 5, and the skeletons have -2 to their WS due to and are now attacking at WS 3, are they using his unmodified WS of 5 as stated by the MWBD rule?
The cake and eat it too is in reference is that for some reason its ok to negate the extra benefits but not the extra penalties?

Now if you want to ask for Speed of Light, thats another rules question wich isent as clearcut as getting miasma, since the wording conflicts and on a single glance it seems they will not get WS10. This is what people should do input on, not like all the other rules-question that is easily solved if you reread the rules with a clear head. Im sorry but they are exactly the same , either both the benefit and penalties of both spells should apply or neither. The same goes for the sword really.

If you have an effect that increases the ws for the entire unit, then they use the prince/kings ws as basis and apply the modifier to that. If the effect would only effect the prince/king then the unit won't benefit from it.Speed of light affects the whole unit (skeletons and prince together) but using WS 10 Is a modified WS (the same as Miasma) so I'd say it wouldn't apply either.


So a Tomb King in a unit of skellies gives that unit a WS of 6. Then a opposing wizard casts miasma on them for D3 minus, and rolls a 6, so they get minus 3 WS. Now, even if the Tomb King has WS of 3, they still use his WS of 6. But they ALSO have miasma on them for Minus 3, and also get a Weapon Skill of 3.
As you see, they STILL use his unmodified WS OF 6, but a game mechanic (spell) has Hexed the WHOLE UNIT, not only the tomb king, and the hex is minus 3 ws.
NOW, were is the contradiction in this?. Reread the signature lore for shadow,reread how EVERY model in the unit is affected by a hex, and reread my will be done.

Not at all, think about it if it didn't say "unmodified". Then if the unit were affected by -2 from miasma, then the prince would be reduced to 3 then the unit would use his WS of 3 and then get reduced again by -2... that would be silly. Likewise you obviously can't pass on your WS10 you get from fencer's blades. But because the unit gets to use his unmodified WS doesn't also mean that their WS is now unmodifiable.
Honestly, when we get into the subject of which order to apply modifiers, it's a bit of a grey area. Normally I run on the principle of:
Substitutions -> Multiplication/Division -> Addition/Subtraction -> Caps (not above 10 or below 1, if applicable)
WFB is a bit vague on this subject but it seems logical and similar to what 40K does.
So let's say you have a tomb prince with fencer's blades under a miasma (-2WS) in a unit of skeletons.
We do substitutions first so the prince is WS10 and the unit is WS5. Then we apply modifiers. So they're WS8 and WS3 respectively.
Please, no matter how its dressed up, or complicated you attempt to make the math, the basic fact remains you are still applying modifiers to their WS in direct opposition to the rule. I get the reasons why you'd want it that way, I really do. Its a benefit you'd really rather the Tomb Kings wouldn't have for some reason. I'm saying that its the other side to the equation, no you cant boost their WS with Items or Spells, I'm down with that, but no matter if you take that WS , add 2 subtract 6 dress it in a suit , juggle it and spin it 3 times, I'm sorry, but your not using that original unmodifies WS anymore , which according to the ability they should regardless of whether its a penalty or a bonus.
If you have a real problem, cast something else on them instead. I'd definitely ask why something like Speed of Light (or any other possible Unit Wide WS bonus) wouldn't work when Miasma apparently should.

Lord Inquisitor
31-07-2013, 02:20
Again, they use his unmodified WS as their WS. After it becomes their WS there's nothing in the rules that says it is unmodifiable. The rule says they use his WS in pace of their own. It becomes their WS and applies just as theirs would in every way.

I don't know of any other substitution that would be regarded as sacrosanct. I've never heard that a unit under Speed of Light and Miasma doesn't substitute to 10 and then modify down from the miasma, for example.

kefkah
31-07-2013, 02:30
Someone called me high handed for calling stuff that might be a rule-query a cheat, but im still insisting that when you have it explained to you in 3 diffrent ways and situation by 3 diffrent people but yet go on with your own intrepertation then that is caught cheating if you apply it in a game.

"You cant have both ways" is NOT a good explaination, since you can have it anyway due to how the rules work.

So, as in any other faith, its now up to you to make the argument. When it says that they use my will be done, were does it says that they now have a static unmodfiable WS? The unit. In the rule for spell (hex) it says it affects the WHOLE unit. Now you have 2 rules YOU have to dissaprove that miasma dosent work.

And for the last time, when they have a miasma -2 on the unit, they are using his unmod of WS5, but they STILL have -2 to their ws. How is that not using my will be done? were in that rule does it says that the unit will for all time now have a unmod ws of 5/6?.

Where do you find the basis for MWBD countering Miasma or any other spell/skill that deals with WS?.

For the DE Whip Of Agony/Crimson Death its stated IN the item that you will ALWAYS strike at S5/6 when wielding that weapon. How does this Relate to the rules query?.

Im willing to change my arguments if someone points out the rules and makes a case for it. Now, can you do that? Otherwise, you have the rules laid out for you regarding my will be done and if you cant reread every part and see that there is no confliction then you are deciding not to do so.

Maoriboy007
31-07-2013, 05:32
Someone called me high handed for calling stuff that might be a rule-query a cheat,Well, yeah it is a bit high handed IMO. I'd go with any FaQ and at a Tournament would certainly call on a ruling first and accept their judgement that might define it one way or the other, but if the rules can support it or an FaQ

but im still insisting that when you have it explained to you in 3 diffrent ways and situation by 3 diffrent people but yet go on with your own intrepertation then that is caught cheating if you apply it in a game.And every single explanation is the same "take the Prince/Kings unmodified WS, apply to unit then (insert explanation/method of subtracting/ applying change or for all intents and purposes modifying WS here). Its not that I fail to understand what you're trying to say, I'm contesting that you are for all intents and purposes using a modified WS which is contrary to the MWBD. If his WS is 5 and (regardless of how and what point in space and time you add or subtract from his WS) his unit then fights with WS 2 how are they using his unmodified WS? I'm no math wizard but I think there is a clear difference between the numbers 2 and 5. Is the difference that the are using A modified WS instead of his WS. RAW this still seems to go against the MWBD rule as I would interpret it.

"You cant have both ways" is NOT a good explaination,..Nor is "my way is right and if you don't use it you're a cheater." about as high handed as I got was a raised eyebrow and "a cake and eat it too" reference,But as far as the reference goes its reasonable to assume since you cant modify the WS positively, neither can you modify them negatively as far as the unmodified rule applies.

since you can have it anyway due to how the rules work..:eyebrows: Yes , and the way the rules work it is entirely possible to counter a spell or ability, for some reason you seemed to think that this is wrong impossible or even unheard of, in my opinion it doesn't even coming close to a :wtf: as far as such things I've encountered in the game.

"So, as in any other faith, its now up to you to make the argument...Well the same goes for your argument as well I suppose, we've each put forward our respective takes on the issue and I'll agree to disagree with you on the issue, I never , however , at any point implied you were a cheat for doing so however, just that you might be wrong. As long as your Tournament Organiser or opponents agree than fell free to play the rule as you've interpreted it in your gaming circle and I'll happily do the same.

"When it says that they use my will be done, were does it says that they now have a static unmodfiable WS?.. The part where it says they use his unmodified WS? AS far as I can tell we interpret unmodified differently

"The unit. In the rule for spell (hex) it says it affects the WHOLE unit. Now you have 2 rules YOU have to dissaprove that miasma dosent work.The army book rules trump the BRB rules for a start nad the MWBD rule says the Unit (and I assume that's the Whole unit) uses his unmodified WS. Both the Hex and Augment (and Fencers Blades) modify WS, but the important WS they are going to be using is his unmodified one.

And for the last time, when they have a miasma -2 on the unit, they are using his unmod of WS5, but they STILL have -2 to their ws. How is that not using my will be done?Fine , but they use his unmodified WS of 5 because that's what the army book rulebook (which applies over the BRB rulebook) say they do

were in that rule does it says that the unit will for all time now have a unmod ws of 5/6?. Not for all time, just until the prince dies or leaves the unit.

Where do you find the basis for MWBD countering Miasma or any other spell/skill that deals with WS?.The part where it says they use his unmodified WS, honestly, and you realise this applies to positive effects as well, such as speed of light , which works in exactly the sme manner but improves the unit?

For the DE Whip Of Agony/Crimson Death its stated IN the item that you will ALWAYS strike at S5/6 when wielding that weapon. How does this Relate to the rules query?.?.If you affected them with , say, the withering spell (or whatever its called), do they strike at str 5/6 or at 5/6 - D3. They are just example I was using where abilities and effects can be unaffected by other abilities and effects.

Im willing to change my arguments if someone points out the rules and makes a case for it...Now, can you do that?.Can you? I certainly think you are entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree with your interpretaiion and you don't agree with mine. That's fine, personally I'd prefer an FaQ ruling and that could go in any direction judging by recent examples (terrorgheists can scream into other combats? Damn)

Otherwise, you have the rules laid out for you regarding my will be done and if you cant reread every part and see that there is no confliction then you are deciding not to do so.Ditto..


Again, they use his unmodified WS as their WS. After it becomes their WS there's nothing in the rules that says it is unmodifiable.. What do you take the definition of unmodified to be then? I'm being honest here, are you saying that its still unmodified when you modify it? For example when I charge a unit in the flank and its steadfast, do they take their break test with a -1 penalty? They are still using their unmodified Ld but I'm just adding a penalty to it after the fact. Playing Devils advocate they FaQd it so that Doom and Darkness does affect steadfast, so really this argument can easily go both ways, whats needed is clarification or a change to the MWBD rule if they want Miasma and Speed of Light to apply.

I don't know of any other substitution that would be regarded as sacrosanct. Using the word unmodified is pretty specific. More often than not clarification is required before you can change something that is unmodifyable. It probably needs a broader FaQ clarification, I'd like one on the effects of all 3, Fencers Blades, Miasma and Speed of Light.

I've never heard that a unit under Speed of Light and Miasma doesn't substitute to 10 and then modify down from the miasma, for example In this case they would get neither the WS 10 or the Miasma. Its a unique rule,but I'd also never heard of a unit that turns into a pillar of flame after it dies rolls around the board killing models and come back to life, voiala' the High Elf Phoenix. Just because its not expected doesn't mean it can't show up in the game. Hell have you read the Demon rulebook?

Lord Inquisitor
31-07-2013, 06:17
They use his unmodified WS as their WS. You take the prince's unmodified WS. This is indubitably without modifiers when you take it from the prince. Now you give this value to the skeletons. At which point it is their new base WS. None of this is under dispute. The question is whether it is now unmodifiable. The presence of the word unmodified is not something I'm contesting but there is a context to it.

As for the word "unmodified" in use by GW in the FAQs that's a whole other can of worms, given the mess they made with the definition of unmodified and the spirit leech FAQs pertaining to unmodified Ld.

kefkah
31-07-2013, 06:31
Sigh. Still nothing ruleswise, covering MWBD,Spell-hexes and miasma even responded to.

If it stated "Any unit accompined by a model with this rule will have his Unmod WS as their own unmod WS" instead of "using his unmod WS as their own", i would buy it.

I can change my argument. Prove TO ME, how that wording will counter, singelhandily, the Miasma spell from shadow. AB trumps BRB, but it has to be worded to trump anything.

What in that WORDING for MWBD(qoute what part) will bypass another rule attached to that unit (miasma). This is what you have to prove.

It says nowhere that the UNIT will have a unmod ws, just that THEY WILL get the PRINCE unmod WS. They have FAQ that its whats on the profile. So, reading the rules and not just my opinion, i check for the triggers. Tomb King in a unit, check the trigger, unmodded WS of 6 transfered to the whole unit while he is in it. Miasma cast with minus 3. Tomb King down 3 ws to ws 3, nothing prevents this. The unit, check that MWBD is still in action, have WS6. They are minus 3 ws. Check trigger if they have a unmod WS. No, that trigger dont exist (prove this). So MYWLD trigger, they have ws6. Miasma triggers, they have -3.

No conflict. Prove, with the rule(reread MWBD some more times) how They will have a unmodified WS (not that they get his Unmod WS) if everything happens.

Just answer that, and i change. Untill it says that the unit have a unmodfiablr ws (not that they get his unmod) i would call that a cheat if someone plays it taht away even after he cant prove it.

Were is the conflict?

Maoriboy007
31-07-2013, 10:16
Sigh. Still nothing ruleswise, covering MWBD,Spell-hexes and miasma even responded to.? Besides mentioning MWBD , Miasma and even speed of light several times?

If it stated "Any unit accompined by a model with this rule will have his Unmod WS as their own unmod WS" instead of "using his unmod WS as their own", i would buy it.So the argument is completely invalid unless it is worded exactly how you think it should be?

I can change my argument. Prove TO ME, how that wording will counter, singelhandily, the Miasma spell from shadow.?If you are the leading and final authority on how the game of warhammer is played then fine I'll give it a try,


B trumps BRB, but it has to be worded to trump anything.
What in that WORDING for MWBD(qoute what part) will bypass another rule attached to that unit (miasma). This is what you have to prove.
It says nowhere that the UNIT will have a unmod ws, just that THEY WILL get the PRINCE unmod WS. They have FAQ that its whats on the profile. So, reading the rules and not just my opinion, i check for the triggers. Tomb King in a unit, check the trigger, unmodded WS of 6 transfered to the whole unit while he is in it. Miasma cast with minus 3. Tomb King down 3 ws to ws 3, nothing prevents this. The unit, check that MWBD is still in action, have WS6. They are minus 3 ws. Check trigger if they have a unmod WS. No, that trigger dont exist (prove this). So MYWLD trigger, they have ws6. Miasma triggers, they have -3.
No conflict. Prove, with the rule(reread MWBD some more times) how They will have a unmodified WS (not that they get his Unmod WS) if everything happens.
Just answer that, and i change. Untill it says that the unit have a unmodfiablr ws (not that they get his unmod) i would call that a cheat if someone plays it taht away even after he cant prove it.
Were is the conflict?


MWBD: Any Nehekaran Undead UNIT (so to clarify this rule affects he whole unit just as much as Miasma or Speed of Light does, so as far as the unit is concerned it trumps any application of a BRB rule to the unit) accompanied by a model with this Rule (so the Prince or King) uses (which I would define as To put into service or apply for a purpose; employ. , if you have another definition I would be interested to know what it is. I would also say that as written this is not necessarily the WS the unit actually has but the one the Unit uses) the characters (said Prince or King) unmodified (which I would define as not changed in form quantity or character , again if you have a different definition please state it) WS in place of its own (as I would regard as being defined as any WS the Unit might currently have whether it be augmented or hexed or not). That's the important part that applies here , the rest goes on to say that characters and mounts are unaffected , use the Highest applicable WS if multiple models have MWBD and that the Unit loses the benefits if said characters are killed and so on.

Miasma: Its a hex obviously, so for the sake of brevity I'll stick to the applicable part of the spell.
The target units WS Ballistic Skill or Movement (you choose which) is reduced by D3 to a minimum of 1 (now I consider this a modification as it is actually changing/modifying the stat involved, do you disagree that this effect is actually modifying the WS? please explain) until the start of the casters next magic phase.
The rest is the boosted version that affect all the stats at once etc.

So how does this work as I see it?

The target is a Tomb Prince (WS 5) and 20 Skeletons (WS 2) in combat. Miasma is cast on them and a 2 is rolled. The Tomb Prince is now WS 3 and the Skeletons are the minimum WS 1. In the combat phase which WS do they use, well it says in black and white the unit of skeletons (but not the prince) uses the unmodified WS of the Tomb Prince, which is 5.
Your opinion is that they have a WS of 3 (which is the modified Princes WS) buts that's not the case. They have a WS of 1! That's what Miasma is doing , giving the unit a lower (modified) WS of 1, and the Prince has a WS of 3. But as per the MWBD rule the WS they use is a WS of 5 which is his unmodified WS as the rule clearly states.

Note that this works the same way for Speed of Light:
Augment the target UNIT (so the skeletons themselves benefit) has Initiative and WS 10 until the start of the casters next phase. So the Skeletons and the Prince are both WS 10, what WS do the skeletons use? WS5, because that's what the MWBD rule says they get to use. Miasma that WS 10 down to 7? What WS do they use? 5 again.

Adding or subtracting numbers and how when and where they are added or subtracted doesn't make a difference , because the fundamental rule is that you USE the UNMODIFIED WS of 5 regardless of what the WS actually is. That's why I like the way this works, it has an upside and a downside.

But I can fully accept that either or both of our opinions can easily be validated or invalidated by a subsequent errata or FaQ which GW have proven can go in any direction. But I can't just accept that your personal opinion is the be all and end all of the matter no matter how vehement you want to be. You have your take on the matter, fine I have mine I don't necessarily think yours is totally invalid, there's enough wordplay there that a future FaQ might even support it. But with the RAW I personally find the logic flawed. Its been expressed that it situation is too unusual or unlikely to support it, and I've expressed that unusual situations outside the norm abound in the game (seriously that Demon book, have you read it?). That's about the gist of it, at the very least I hope I've gone into the detail you wanted.

kefkah
31-07-2013, 10:45
Ok now i see that you have got me wrong.

Last post i do here, if you cant see my reasoning you never will, and maybe this will clear this up. For the 4 time, if you cant even what we are saying correct how can you just say thats its my personal take when you clearly dont still understand what im saying. So your argument dident prove me, and i say why, and you maybe can understand what im saying.

In your examlpe, the 20 skeletons are NEVER WS 2(never ever). They, by MWBD, WS 5 all the time while he is in the unit. They are Never 2, since that is ignoring MWBD rule, wich is not a may so thats not legal. So both the Prince and 20 skelleis has ws 5. This is the REAL meaning of the rule, they are never ws 2, they use his unmod of ws5 instead of their own.

So miasma gets cast for minus 2 on them. IN combat, THEY use MWBD WS of 5 (always). And THEN they have Miasma for 2, that makes it to WS 3 and not WS 1. For this to be your WAY, it has to state somewere that they will have a unmod WS OF 5, otherwise there is NOTHING that deals with the UNITS own WS, other then that they have the Tomb Kings Unmodified WS5 as THEIR OWN. Its not a static, in gameterms its that they work like it was WRITTEN AS WS 5 on the profile INSTEAD of WS 2.

No you dident get into the detail i wanted. You dident even get what i was saying even when going throught the important parts in CAPS so it would be easier.

The Logic WOULD be FLAWED by RAW it did mention anywhere that the unit has a unmod WS.

Im not talking about the demon book or unusal sitations but a clear cut rules query.

Im not talking about speed of light since there it could be argued both ways and i dont want to get in to it, but MIASMA is clear cut.

Danny76
31-07-2013, 12:44
This whole dispute came from the fencers blades which are very different to the miasma.

If a spell gave the unit WS10 let's say, they WOULD get it.
The unmodified leadership you take from the prince is like a replacement to on your profile. Then stuff still happens to it from that point.
It's only because fencers specifically give the prince the modifier that they can't claim it.

Vipoid
31-07-2013, 13:08
:eyebrows: Sounds like a bit of a stretch of trying to have your cake and eat it too to me "sure you can have all the penalties but none of the benefits" I mean the whole fencers blades thing involves exactly the same kind of wordplay. In the same instance I would expect the unit affected by the speed of light spell to use a Tomb Princes WS of 5 rather than 10 as well.

I think you're confusing specific and unit-wide effects.

Fencer's Blades is a specific effect - it affects the tomb prince, but does nothing to his squad. because of the wording of MWbD, the extra WS from the blades is not transferred. The same applies to any other affect that raises or lowers the prince's WS. If a spell or ability lowers his WS (but not his unit's), then his unit will still be fighting at WS5.

Unit-wide effects are a different kettle of fish, because they don't just affect his WS. Instead they affect both his WS and his entire unit's WS. They still start with his unmodified WS5, but that is then raised or lowered as described in the spell. They're still using his unmodified WS, but then their own WS (currently 5) is being modified after that.

You see, you're complaining that you only receive the penalties, but you're mistaken. You do not receive benefits or penalties for effects that only change the tomb prince's WS. However, you receive the penalties and benefits of any affect that alters the WS of the entire unit - you just use WS5 as a baseline.



The target is a Tomb Prince (WS 5) and 20 Skeletons (WS 2) in combat. Miasma is cast on them and a 2 is rolled. The Tomb Prince is now WS 3 and the Skeletons are the minimum WS 1. In the combat phase which WS do they use, well it says in black and white the unit of skeletons (but not the prince) uses the unmodified WS of the Tomb Prince, which is 5.
Your opinion is that they have a WS of 3 (which is the modified Princes WS) buts that's not the case. They have a WS of 1! That's what Miasma is doing , giving the unit a lower (modified) WS of 1, and the Prince has a WS of 3. But as per the MWBD rule the WS they use is a WS of 5 which is his unmodified WS as the rule clearly states.

You're applying the effects in the wrong order.

The skeletons are already WS5 at the time miasma is cast, because they're already using the prince's WS. So, the entire unit is WS5, and then miasma is cast. The prince goes down to WS3, but the skeletons are still using his unmodified WS5. Then, miasma affects them as well, lowering their WS to 3.

thrawn
31-07-2013, 16:38
From the TK FAQ -

Q:If a Tomb King has the Fencers Blades, does the My Will Be
Done special rule mean that he makes his unit Weapon Skill 10?
(p30).
A: No; use the Tomb King’s unmodified Weapon Skill of 6,
not his modified value of 10.

Seems pretty clear to me. WD guys just played it wrong, they're only human and make mistakes after all.

ya they make mistakes i won't hold it against them, just funny though, we always can't get the rules right and apparently neither can they!

Maoriboy007
31-07-2013, 21:40
Ok now i see that you have got me wrong.
Last post i do here, if you cant see my reasoning you never will, and maybe this will clear this up. For the 4 time, if you cant even what we are saying correct how can you just say thats its my personal take when you clearly dont still understand what im saying. So your argument dident prove me, and i say why, and you maybe can understand what im saying. I'm honestly not sure whether I'm at fault here for not being clear or at fault for not just agreeing with you. I fully understand your argument, but I don't agree with your definitions.

In your examlpe, the 20 skeletons are NEVER WS 2(never ever). They, by MWBD, WS 5 all the time while he is in the unit. They are Never 2, since that is ignoring MWBD rule, wich is not a may so thats not legal. So both the Prince and 20 skelleis has ws 5. This is the REAL meaning of the rule, they are never ws 2, they use his unmod of ws5 instead of their own.
So miasma gets cast for minus 2 on them. IN combat, THEY use MWBD WS of 5 (always). And THEN they have Miasma for 2, that makes it to WS 3 and not WS 1. For this to be your WAY, it has to state somewere that they will have a unmod WS OF 5, otherwise there is NOTHING that deals with the UNITS own WS, other then that they have the Tomb Kings Unmodified WS5 as THEIR OWN. Its not a static, in gameterms its that they work like it was WRITTEN AS WS 5 on the profile INSTEAD of WS 2.I respectfully disagree, at no point is the WS on the Skeletons profile changed to the Tomb Kings. Their WS remains 2, they merely use the Princes WS when required to , such as a test or in combat, its a fine distinction that they HAVE their own WS but USE the princes WS unmodified at any time required

No you dident get into the detail i wanted. You dident even get what i was saying even when going throught the important parts in CAPS so it would be easier.
The Logic WOULD be FLAWED by RAW it did mention anywhere that the unit has a unmod WS.Again I'm honestly not sure whether I'm at fault here for not being clear or at fault for no just agreeing with you.

Im not talking about the demon book or unusal sitations but a clear cut rules query.Jeez just trying to satisfy your assertion that the situation would be too unusual or "wrong"" to exist, its not unusual or "wrong"in context of the game at large.

Im not talking about speed of light since there it could be argued both waysIt affects the unit in any way Miasma would, in my opinion it wouldn't work

and i dont want to get in to it, but MIASMA is clear cut. Miasma being a spell is clear cut, how it effects MWBD is in dispute as far as I'm concerned, regardless of any ultimatums you might wat to deliver

This whole dispute came from the fencers blades which are very different to the miasma.Agreed , RAW its pretty clear cut the Blades don't apply as they modify the Princes WS, that's why they are excluded from my example.

If a spell gave the unit WS10 let's say, they WOULD get it.I disagree, the higher WS being used isn't the princes unmodified WS

The unmodified leadership you take from the prince is like a replacement to on your profile.For workable intents and purposes maybe, but the wording is pretty clear, they don't replace the WS , that's why I've stated the skeletons actually have their own WS of 2 (or whatever Mods)

Then stuff still happens to it from that point. IF the WS was replaced I'd probably agree, the only time specified is the word use as to put into action , at which point the WS is unmodified, as far as I can tell every other example wants to put into use a modified WS.

It's only because fencers specifically give the prince the modifier that they can't claim it. Again I agree.


I think you're confusing specific and unit-wide effects. Not at all, in fct Im pretty sure I was clear on the issue. MWBD , Speed of Light and Miasma are all affect the unit in question, I agree with the Fencers Blade FaQ. RAW it doesn't boost the units WS because it modifies the princs WS. I think it SHOULD, but that is another issue

Fencer's Blades is a specific effect - it affects the tomb prince, but does nothing to his squad. because of the wording of MWbD, the extra WS from the blades is not transferred. The same applies to any other affect that raises or lowers the prince's WS. If a spell or ability lowers his WS (but not his unit's), then his unit will still be fighting at WS5..Perhaps this is part of the issue, at no point do I disagree that the FaQ is wrong, the Fencers Blades have NO effect on the units WS, I fully agree here, it specifically affects the prince by MODIFYING his WS to 10 which is clearly covered in the MWBD rule.

Unit-wide effects are a different kettle of fish, because they don't just affect his WS. Instead they affect both his WS and his entire unit's WS.
[QUOTE=Vipoid;6862276] They still start with his unmodified WS5,..At Kefkahs request I provided the exact wording or the spell. They do not replace , change have or Increase their WS to 5 as the rule is written, they actually still have their own WS stat, sure for usable intents purposes they may as well have WS5 as long as the prince is alive, but its not what their actual WS stat is on their profile. Its a fine distinction, but of such things are FaQs Errattas and Hours of Internt discussion made.

but that is then raised or lowered as described in the spell. They're still using his unmodified WS, but then their own WS (currently 5) is being modified after that.Read your own last sentence again carefully. When fighting in combat , do the skeletons actually use the unmodified WS or not, every counter argument seems to definitively say no, it seems to be satisfied with ät some point the skeletons use the unmodied WS

You see, you're complaining that you only receive the penalties, but you're mistaken. You do not receive benefits or penalties for effects that only change the tomb prince's WS..And I've said I agree, changes to the Princes WS are meaningless for this purpouse.

However, you receive the penalties and benefits of any affect that alters the WS of the entire unit - you just use WS5 as a baseline..You don't use the WS äs a baseline" thats the problem as I see it and where the disagreement obviously is. I've written the MWBD rule down, that's not what it says at all. I don't think I'm being unreasonable, but I can understand how you think the rule should work. I think the rule Should work so that Fencers Blades apply, but RAW they don't

You're applying the effects in the wrong orderHeres where I identify as being another cusp of the conflict, RAW I see miasma affecting the WS the unit has whereas MWBD specifies the WS the unit uses, which is unmodified. The order of events is designated by the word use, trying to modfy it after that means the unit does not USE the unmodified WS as the rule states they should. Its a distinction just as valid as counless others that populate the forums and churn out FaQs.

The skeletons are already WS5 at the time miasma is cast, because they're already using the prince's WS. So, the entire unit is WS5, and then miasma is cast. The prince goes down to WS3, but the skeletons are still using his unmodified WS5. Then, miasma affects them as well, lowering their WS to 3.So I've gone through this above, but I'll just say I'd like to see an FaQ one way or the other, it I'd like to see both Speed of Light and Miasma Equally affective or Unafeective either way.

Lord Inquisitor
31-07-2013, 21:54
MWBD: Any Nehekaran Undead UNIT (so to clarify this rule affects he whole unit just as much as Miasma or Speed of Light does, so as far as the unit is concerned it trumps any application of a BRB rule to the unit) accompanied by a model with this Rule (so the Prince or King) uses (which I would define as To put into service or apply for a purpose; employ. , if you have another definition I would be interested to know what it is. I would also say that as written this is not necessarily the WS the unit actually has but the one the Unit uses) the characters (said Prince or King) unmodified (which I would define as not changed in form quantity or character , again if you have a different definition please state it) WS in place of its own (as I would regard as being defined as any WS the Unit might currently have whether it be augmented or hexed or not). That's the important part that applies here , the rest goes on to say that characters and mounts are unaffected , use the Highest applicable WS if multiple models have MWBD and that the Unit loses the benefits if said characters are killed and so on.

Miasma: Its a hex obviously, so for the sake of brevity I'll stick to the applicable part of the spell.
The target units WS Ballistic Skill or Movement (you choose which) is reduced by D3 to a minimum of 1 (now I consider this a modification as it is actually changing/modifying the stat involved, do you disagree that this effect is actually modifying the WS? please explain) until the start of the casters next magic phase.
The rest is the boosted version that affect all the stats at once etc.

So how does this work as I see it?

The target is a Tomb Prince (WS 5) and 20 Skeletons (WS 2) in combat. Miasma is cast on them and a 2 is rolled. The Tomb Prince is now WS 3 and the Skeletons are the minimum WS 1. In the combat phase which WS do they use, well it says in black and white the unit of skeletons (but not the prince) uses the unmodified WS of the Tomb Prince, which is 5.
Your opinion is that they have a WS of 3 (which is the modified Princes WS) buts that's not the case. They have a WS of 1! That's what Miasma is doing , giving the unit a lower (modified) WS of 1, and the Prince has a WS of 3. But as per the MWBD rule the WS they use is a WS of 5 which is his unmodified WS as the rule clearly states.

Note that this works the same way for Speed of Light:
Augment the target UNIT (so the skeletons themselves benefit) has Initiative and WS 10 until the start of the casters next phase. So the Skeletons and the Prince are both WS 10, what WS do the skeletons use? WS5, because that's what the MWBD rule says they get to use. Miasma that WS 10 down to 7? What WS do they use? 5 again.

Adding or subtracting numbers and how when and where they are added or subtracted doesn't make a difference , because the fundamental rule is that you USE the UNMODIFIED WS of 5 regardless of what the WS actually is. That's why I like the way this works, it has an upside and a downside.

Your argument therefore has nothing to do with the unmodified bit - we all agree the skeletons use the unmodified WS of the king. The whole "unmodified" thing is a red herring.

What you're saying is you apply the modifier first, then you do the substitution.

We're saying you do the substitution first, then the modifier. Hence my post #16.

I think there's a lack of clarity as to what order you apply the modifiers and this is not a question that's unique to tomb kings. For example, if you're in combat with my Yhettees and you fail a Fear test, are you WS1 (apply -1 then substitute to 1) or WS0 (substitute to 1 then apply the -1)? There's a big difference there since WS0 is hit automatically.

In general, I believe the consensus is substitutions then modifiers and the yhettee WS0 trick does work. However, I've heard a few interpretations on this. You can even invoke the usual timing mechanic (i.e. player whose turn it is decides which order to apply substitutions and modifiers).

kefkah
31-07-2013, 23:19
Question: If it says That they use the TK unmod WS in place of their own untill he leaves the unit, how does they still only have ws 2? there is nothing about it being applied in combat.

Your jumping over quite some rules here.

I think Lords last part is very good. If you insist on wich order ( apperantly miasma goes before MWBD, wick apperantly again keeps triggering again every phase for some kind of "priority) then thats it.

My biggest problem is that you keep writing " i like to see nothing work or everything to work", in lieu of your previous comment " cant have your cake and eat it". My first Time coming over this type of comment was when someone dident accept that my Cannon will blast through his 3 rank of Ogres if i rolled well. And i said no, thats just how the rules freaking are.

So its nothing to do with "hey it should go all way", its about how the rules work, they may go 100 % in one direction and none in the other and it dosent matter if thats how the rule works.

Im done here. These 3 guys write better english then me and better arguments then me and i see thats its not my writing that got you confused since you refute them wich same stuff your telling me. If you use this ingame after getting it this explained to yet go on with your own rule in your head then that is nothing more as using any other cheat.

Vipoid
31-07-2013, 23:27
Marioboy007, I propose a different scenario to you:

I have a squad of chaos warriors, and a chaos lord. The lord is in a separate squad, but close enough to provide inspiring presence.

Now, my opponent successfully casts Doom and Darkness on the squad of chaos warriors, giving them -3Ld. They are then required to take a Ld test (with D&D still in effect).

Are you saying that, by using inspiring presence, I can use the chaos lord's Ld for the warriors and thus ignore the penalty from Doom and Darkness?

kefkah
01-08-2013, 05:04
Wow now thats a good answer, rather then my stress filled ones.

WLBjork
01-08-2013, 07:45
Well, I'll throw a new problem into the discussion.

Historically, GW have used the word "unmodified" instead of "unmodifiable". 2nd ed. 40k, and IIRC 4th/5th ed. Warhammer used this terminology for what are now called Invulnerable/Ward saves.

The question is have GW changed their terminology, or have we been playing things incorrectly?

kefkah
01-08-2013, 07:55
Well, I'll throw a new problem into the discussion.

Historically, GW have used the word "unmodified" instead of "unmodifiable". 2nd ed. 40k, and IIRC 4th/5th ed. Warhammer used this terminology for what are now called Invulnerable/Ward saves.

The question is have GW changed their terminology, or have we been playing things incorrectly?

In this case, its very easy since according to the latest GW FAQ on MWBD Its 6 for king, 5 for prince. But no one is disputing that MWBD is eaither 6 for king or 5 for prince.

What is in dispute is something else wich you can read here.

I think Vipoids question is a very good one. For someone to use the argument that MWBD counters Miasma, then he must accept that Inspiring Presense counters D&D to be consistent ( wrong, but still be consistent). Same argument, same game mechanic.

Fallenturtle
02-08-2013, 04:56
They could also be using a version of the FAQ's that we can't see yet..

Vipoid
02-08-2013, 09:56
They could also be using a version of the FAQ's that we can't see yet..

Probably because it only ever existed within the confines of their own heads.

Maoriboy007
02-08-2013, 11:31
Marioboy007, I propose a different scenario to you:

I have a squad of chaos warriors, and a chaos lord. The lord is in a separate squad, but close enough to provide inspiring presence.

Now, my opponent successfully casts Doom and Darkness on the squad of chaos warriors, giving them -3Ld. They are then required to take a Ld test (with D&D still in effect).

Are you saying that, by using inspiring presence, I can use the chaos lord's Ld for the warriors and thus ignore the penalty from Doom and Darkness?Do they use the Chaos Lords unmodified Ld? If so then yes, but does the rule state that they get to use the unmodified Ld. Take steadfast, it specifies that it is unmodified by Combat results and IP states thet they get to use the Lords Ld for this test. if you had a spell that added +2 to your combat result, then the Warriors still get to use their steadfast Ld UNMODIFIED, because that is how the rule is written, they get to use the Lords Ld in this Instance AND its unmodified. Nor does the unit replace their own Ld with the Chaos Lords own, a test specifying the units own unmodifies Ld will still be 7 (or whatever it is) because they don't use the Lord Ld for it. Finally Doom and Darkness was specifically errata'd with Strength in Numbers for similar reasons so there is a precident. The Issue needs a specific FaQ, which is required far more than the Fencers Blades one, which seems fairly obvious.

kefkah
02-08-2013, 11:48
Not answered again.

I dont get really what you are saying. D&D is negated by using IP, or its not negated and thats only due to there being a FAQ dealing with D&D and Strength in Numbers?.

The thing is, for your argument to be valid, then IP will also have to always negate D&D. So now you have to prove both.

Btw: unmodified LD(leadership) as it is right now is the highest LD in the unit, and you can use IP for Spirit Leech.

Also if your steadfast, having d&d, in the range of the General, you STILL dont discount D&D.

Your taking it that Unmodified LD negates D&D, wich it dosent. However this discussion have a bigger merit then the original involving miasma since nowhere there is it stated that the unit will have a unmod WS.

Marioboy, i hate to say this, but your A) big lost and wont accept or even reread anything or B) came across something wich you are the only one to get it.

Im a big proponent that stuff like, is a daemon prince a daemon and your example not to get to the FAQ.

Maoriboy007
02-08-2013, 13:14
Question: If it says That they use the TK unmod WS in place of their own untill he leaves the unit, how does they still only have ws 2?.How about the part that the words "use" and "have" are completely different with different definitions.


there is nothing about it being applied in combat..Apart from the occasional test and other rare occasions, combat is the general application for WS which is at other times a Static number on the units profile.


Your jumping over quite some rules here..I've provided the specific rules that apply with quotes and examples, if there are rules that apply that you feel I have 'jumped " over , please do me the courtesy of specifying them and explaining how I've jumped them.

I think Lords last part is very good. If you insist on wich order ( apperantly miasma goes before MWBD, wick apperantly again keeps triggering again every phase for some kind of "priority) then thats it..You missed the part where he admitted there are interpretations to the rule and again you are accepting yours as canon. Lord has at least put forward a proposal that say there is interpretations either way, which I find reasonable, I've said it myself, that's why we need an FaQ before one side or the other can be considered definitive.


My biggest problem is that you keep writing " i like to see nothing work or everything to work", in lieu of your previous comment " cant have your cake and eat it"Please don't misquote me or take statements out of context in an attempt to aggrandise yourself. I used the cake and eat it too quote once in earnest, and after that merely included in lines of explanations in replies for demands for clarification, if you stop repeating it yourself I will too. Nor do I keep writing " I like to see nothing work or everything to work" and nor is it in lieu of anything. It is completely separate. I have said that in an FaQ speed of light and miasma should both apply or neither, AFTER explaining they are similar unit affecting spells (as requested) that work in a nearly identical fashion. Separately I said that the Rule (being the MWBD rule) should work so that fencers blades applied but RAW they don't, again I don't have a problem with Fencers Blades, they got it right.

My first Time coming over this type of comment was when someone dident accept that my Cannon will blast through his 3 rank of Ogres if i rolled well. And i said no, thats just how the rules freaking are..In that one case you were right, it doesn't automatically mean you always are, different situation, different rule. In this case there is a definite dispute. They are also completely different applications. I this instance we all agree that fencers blades don't apply, Its a bummer for TK but such is life, does Speed of Light apply?, a definite perk for TKs but probably not you reckon, Miasma? Modify away despite both being WS modifying spells! We'd call it a one eyed ref over here, but the cake reference is more well recognised. Where I differ is that I think the Positive aspect ( not being affected by Miasma) and the Negative Effect (not being affected by Speed of Light) should BOTH apply.

So its nothing to do with "hey it should go all way", its about how the rules work, they may go 100 % in one direction and none in the other and it dosent matter if thats how the rule works..Another nonsense sentence more emotion than fact. We are in a rules dispute, and I have provided far more rules information and examples that are pertinent than you have. I have more success understanding Vipoid and LI who while have a differing opinion to me, put forward better reasoned arguments that at least make sense regardless of whether I agree or not.


Im done here. These 3 guys write better english then me and better arguments then me and i see thats its not my writing that got you confused since you refute them wich same stuff your telling me. If you use this ingame after getting it this explained to yet go on with your own rule in your head then that is nothing more as using any other cheat.Yeah there we go again. I get the feeling there is a language barrier here, as you seem to ignore any replies you want don't want to see , invent other concepts and bring up other irrelevant ones. Do you often solve rules disputes by just claiming the other person is a cheat or do you offer reasonable explanations and arguments , from what I can tell its not the latter, good one bro.

Not answered again..Only because you are being deliberately obtuse and are just not looking for an answer, I'd guess both.

I dont get really what you are saying... The argument is flawed, it involves rules that are not equally applicable. Specifically and unmodified test. The Lords Ld can be modified.

D&D is negated by using IP, or its not negated and thats only due to there being a FAQ dealing with D&D and Strength in Numbers?.The fact that they had to errata the SiN for a different spell for similar reasons validates the original argument and is more reason this issue should be settled by an errata.

The thing is, for your argument to be valid, then IP will also have to always negate D&D. So now you have to prove both.You have misread, IP is not unmodified, it does not include the word unmodified in it, which was the purpose of the first two lines, I don't have to prove it because the conflict with an unmodified stat does not exist.

Btw: unmodified LD(leadership) as it is right now is the highest LD in the unit, and you can use IP for Spirit Leech..I'd like to point out this could change next week, the definition has changed more than once. Vampires could Mindrazor Zombies to 10 str then they couldn't, now they apparently can again....

Also if your steadfast, having d&d, in the range of the General, you STILL dont discount D&D. ..Because D&D is excluded from the steadfast requirements, which only include CR. If D&D were a spell that applied a negative modifier to CR instead, the unit would be immune to D&D because its included in the criteria to make the units LD Unmodified.

Your taking it that Unmodified LD negates D&D, wich it dosent. ..Depends on whether you have an unmodified LD or you get to use an unmodified Ld, the context is completely different as are the situations. The wrds used are important.

However this discussion have a bigger merit then the original involving miasma since nowhere there is it stated that the unit will have a unmod WS...I agree , it says the unit will use an unmodified WS, different words bro.

Marioboy, i hate to say this, but your A) big lost and wont accept or even reread anything or..Yeah, you can tell by the way I don't reply with line by line quotes, specifices, requested explanations counter arguments definitions and the like. Said that an FaQ could decide the issue in either direction :rolleyes: I don't get the feeling you hate to say anything but prefer to say whatever comes to mind at the time...

B) came across something wich you are the only one to get it..you mean the actual wording of MWBD?

Im a big proponent that stuff like, is a daemon prince a daemon.Well hurrah...

and your example not to get to the FAQ.Sorry, you'll have to elaborate on this one I'm not sure what you mean here.:eyebrows:

Vipoid
02-08-2013, 13:50
Do they use the Chaos Lords unmodified Ld?

Why does that matter?

In the example I gave, the Chaos Lord's Ld is not being modified in any way. It's the chaos warriors that have had their Ld modified.

kefkah
02-08-2013, 14:04
Ok sorry.

Boils down to this.

Spells like D&D, Miasma etc, have no effect on stuff that contain the word unmodifiable, whatever context they are in and whatever spell takes place.

That boilds down to = D&D can never apply to stubborn, since stubborn is steadfast and steadfast is a test on unmod leadership. Miasma wont work on a unit with MYBWD.

My take is = On miasma and MYWBD, there is nowere stating that the unit has WS5 for all time while MWBD is in place, only that is their ws. So you have to really convince me (wich you havent) that a spell that targets the whole unit (D&D and Miasma) and have no conflicting rules, are automaticly countered.

Also, if going by that line, things that have their Toughness lowered and then get hit by a Toughness test will also counter that spell and use their regular one.

My elaborating= Even with my poor english skill, i cant see a reason why a spell like D&D and miasma goes poof, when i cant read that clearly in the rules that they go poof.

Im just gonna say gz to convincing anyone you play with IRL that the D&D they just cast on your steadfast/Stubborn unit have no effect.

My last point was that stupid stuff like this (wich most people, and i mean most even with lackluster english) have no problem understanding after playing for a while and rereading the rules to get uppdated, dont need a FAQ but the rule-errors need. My point with the Daemon Prince was that its stubborn people like you who cant give a good argument ( ive read em and still no real answer on why the chain of logic i and others propose are false, and how you can just negate a spell like that) wont bend and keep asking that so in the next FAQ GW has to confirm that the Daemon Prince is a Daemon.

Lord Inquisitor
02-08-2013, 17:01
Death by extreme quotation there Maoriboy. That's really hard to read through.

Can we agree with what you said earlier - that the "unmodified" part is not the crux of the issue? It is whether the modifier is applied before the replacement or after.

Methios
02-08-2013, 18:26
I actualy bought the WD cause i have a LM army and was excited. But i think its verry sad they use army lists that suck and get the rules wrong. My will be done is faq'ed for ages and stickied on almost all TK sites. (primerly a TK player atm) I find it verry hard to believe that the TK player realy plays his so called beloved army.

Maoriboy007
02-08-2013, 22:09
Death by extreme quotation there Maoriboy. That's really hard to read through..Sorry about that, when being continually told that I haven't explained/answered, or that I've missed something even after going into such detail I guess I wanted to see if they had actually managed to miss the important parts or are just reading the arts they want and are ignoring the rest, this is obviously a waste of time if someone just wants to disagree for the sake of disagreeing, that's cool I simply wont bother anymore.

Can we agree with what you said earlier - that the "unmodified" part is not the crux of the issue? Its still an important part of the equation though, its a factor counts just as much as any spell in question, but yes the crux is probably the next part...

It is whether the modifier is applied before the replacement or after. Fair statement, one I can probably agree with. Contrary to what's some might say I've stated several times that their is wiggle room either way that a ruling is probably required. In this I think I am being far more reasonable than certain individual.