PDA

View Full Version : Casting 'Deliverance of Itza'



Persufflation
13-08-2013, 00:10
in the old book it explicitly stated that the spell affects enemy's even if engaged in close combat...it doesn't do this now...

It is 'direct damage' which can't normally be cast into combat

I have a feeling this was an oversight and will be FAQ'd to work how it did before...but can you cast this spell if there are engaged enemy units within 12"?

Bill

Blkc57
13-08-2013, 00:50
No, if it is classed as direct damage it may not be cast into a combat, you can wait and hope for an FAQ to undo this (and something tells me this wasn't an oversight much like how them leaving flaming off of the Fires of Tzeentch wasn't actually an oversight) but until then Deliverance of Itza will only damage un-engaged units.

Persufflation
13-08-2013, 01:10
so, if I understand correctly:

since it targets ALL enemy units withing a 12"+ bubble; it can't be cast if there is 1+ close combat engaged enemy units within this bubble...otherwise it would target said cc engaged unit(s) (which it can't do since it is direct damage) according to the wording of the spell (it would say 'targets unengaged enemy units' if it was meant to only target unengaged enemy units within the bubble)

since this is his only spell he can ever know it kind of means he can only cast for very rare situations where this condition is met...

as an aside,
was there a fires of tzeentch in the old book that was flaming?

Blkc57
13-08-2013, 01:23
Does it actually say ALL in the book, Persufflation? In the originally post you said it was just a direct damage spell and didn't say it had any target information in its spell wording. If it specifically states that the spell may "target all enemy units" then that could possibly override the direct damage rule that prevents casting into combat if the wording was specific enough, as the more advanced targeting rules of the spell Deliverance takes precedence, but I don't have a new army book near me to look up the exact wording of the spell. In any case if it did in fact only target un-engaged then that would not prevent you from casting it if one unit was engaged and another unit wasn't, it would only mean that only one unit would be effected.

Also the Fires of Tzeentch rule was something that was listed in the White dwarf and it had flaming then but when the actual book came out they removed flaming from it and many people thought it was an oversight, instead it was a purposeful nerf by GW which was revealed by the release of the FAQ that confirmed that Tzeentch fire is not in fact flaming.

Persufflation
13-08-2013, 01:32
sorry for not posting the text originally:

'the deliverance of itza is a direct damage spell that targets all enemy units within 12". each target suffers 2d6 S4 hits. if a unit has daemonic undead or nehekaharan undead rules it does 3d6 s4 hits. it can be boosted in range for increased cost 18", 18+; 24", 24+.'

is how it reads from the book

this is how I initially read it but it doesn't explicitly state that is can be cast into combat anymore either and so can be argued that it can't...there was also questions over whether it had to be cast on units only in the front arc too...

hamsterwheel
13-08-2013, 01:37
In most cases where a spell is able to target units in close combat, it usually specifically says it can. I would say that unless it has wording in the spell description specific to targeting units in cc, then it can't. I would also say that since it's a direct damage spell, it only effects models within the front arc since direct damage spells are prohibited in targeting units outside the front arc.

Honestly if they want to fix the spell, they need to change it to a Hex spell like they did with Cacophonic Choir the Slaanesh spell.

Persufflation
13-08-2013, 09:37
The only direct damage spells i can think of which allow you to cast into combat are 'gaze of mork' and 'the burning head'...

The text allowing this was added in errata/faq...

yeknoMehT
13-08-2013, 12:21
sorry for not posting the text originally:

'the deliverance of itza is a direct damage spell that targets all enemy units within 12". each target suffers 2d6 S4 hits. if a unit has daemonic undead or nehekaharan undead rules it does 3d6 s4 hits. it can be boosted in range for increased cost 18", 18+; 24", 24+.'

is how it reads from the book

this is how I initially read it but it doesn't explicitly state that is can be cast into combat anymore either and so can be argued that it can't...there was also questions over whether it had to be cast on units only in the front arc too...


I'm not sure there's much to be argued there - direct damage spells cannot target units that are engaged, or units outside the front arc. While it targets all enemy units in range, those outside the front arc or in combat are not eligible targets and so are not affected. An instruction to "target all enemy units within..." is not the same as simply "all enemy units within..." The requirement that they be targeted brings in the target restrictions, it does not override them.

The way spells worked in previous editions is not in general a definite indicator of how spells should work.

Persufflation
13-08-2013, 12:58
Thanks for the comments...guess this is RAW how it should be played...the part that got me was the lack of text from prior editions and the logical conundrum of if it can be cast if there are targets that can't be targeted got me hung up...I will hope for an FAQ to make it clear how it should be played but until that comes out this is how it works....

Walgis
13-08-2013, 15:02
well if it says all units in 12" it has to be all units in 12" no mather if theyre in CC or if theyre not in your forward ark because it would be all units and it would be all units in 12".
BTW was the faq/erata changed? as i remember they made for spells erata and changed forward arks requirement and DD spell requirement. Or do i mix something?

hamsterwheel
13-08-2013, 15:54
well if it says all units in 12" it has to be all units in 12" no mather if theyre in CC or if theyre not in your forward ark because it would be all units and it would be all units in 12".
BTW was the faq/erata changed? as i remember they made for spells erata and changed forward arks requirement and DD spell requirement. Or do i mix something?

If only that were true. The magic section in the main book clearly outlines how each spell is restricted by the standard 4 restrictions and how the spell type can remove or add additional restrictions to the spell. The writer made a mistake by making the spell a DD spell instead of a Hex. They'll have to errata the spell to fix it. The lines in the magic section that basically says the spell does what it says it does only applies to spells that have no type.

warplock
13-08-2013, 19:11
Is there a single rule in the new LM book that isn't ambiguou or flat-out wrong, and needs an FAQ? It's absolutely pathetic!

GotrekFan
13-08-2013, 20:45
The rules of the spell override the standard DD targeting restrictions.
DD spells stop you from targeting A unit in combat, but as this spell hits all within a set range, there is no individual unit targeted so all are affected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hamsterwheel
13-08-2013, 21:16
The rules of the spell override the standard DD targeting restrictions.
DD spells stop you from targeting A unit in combat, but as this spell hits all within a set range, there is no individual unit targeted so all are affected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This only works if the spell does not have a spell type. When it does have a spell type, the spell needs a specific clause to circumvent the standard restrictions and the DD restrictions which this spell does not. I do believe the intent was to allow this to affect all enemy units within 12" of the caster and it was probably made a DD so skink priests could pass the spell through but the writer didn't think about models in combat or about the forward arc. Other books have gotten around this issue by making the spell a hex but in this case a hex can't be cast through a Skink Priest.

yeknoMehT
14-08-2013, 08:13
The rules of the spell override the standard DD targeting restrictions.
DD spells stop you from targeting A unit in combat, but as this spell hits all within a set range, there is no individual unit targeted so all are affected.

Firstly, as stated previously, the rules do not override the DD restrictions (unless they explicitly stated that they did, which they don't).

Secondly, the spell does not 'hit' all units within a set range, it 'targets' them. Only legal targets can actually be targeted (so attempts to target them fail, as the spell does nothing to such units).
There is not necessarily a single unit targeted, each individual unit in range is targeted seperately.

Lord Solar Plexus
14-08-2013, 09:43
The rules of the spell override the standard DD targeting restrictions.
DD spells stop you from targeting A unit in combat, but as this spell hits all within a set range, there is no individual unit targeted so all are affected.

The restrictions are not based upon the number of targets, nor do they differentiate between individual units and groups. You always need to read "all eligible" of course.

There are no "rules" of the spell to override anything. At most, there's one small word but I don't think that is enough.

Persufflation
14-08-2013, 09:52
Is there a single rule in the new LM book that isn't ambiguou or flat-out wrong, and needs an FAQ? It's absolutely pathetic!

Agreed 100%...really losing steam...it seems whenever I open the book they left out a sentance here or there which totally changes how the unit/spell works...with this form of casting deliverance Kroak is no where near his points...you can't join terradon/ripper characters to terradon/ripper units...etc...

lees mekshop
15-08-2013, 00:42
OK let's say it doesn't target units in CC or any units not in the forward arch but does that mean it still goes off if there is/a unit in let's say 6" would the spell be able to target over units in the 12"cone or would you just say the spell cannot be cast as their is on we unit that doesn't fit the DD rules

hamsterwheel
15-08-2013, 01:01
If playing strictly by RAW, I would say that it hits all enemy units in the front arc that are not engaged in combat. If playing by how it should be played, I would just allow it to hit units in combat and outside the forward arc. I'm sure this isn't what was intended.

Spinocus
15-08-2013, 18:14
Wow. C'mon guys, this is pretty cut and dry...

'the deliverance of itza is a direct damage spell that targets all enemy units within 12". each target suffers 2d6 S4 hits. if a unit has daemonic undead or nehekaharan undead rules it does 3d6 s4 hits. it can be boosted in range for increased cost 18", 18+; 24", 24+.'

"Targets all enemy units within 12" means there is no target discrepancy or voluntary targeting action required by the controlling player. You cast it and the spell determines the targets, not the player. ALL enemy units within 12", engaged or not, in front, behind or on either side, get hit, period. The word ALL overrides any arc requirements laid down by the BRB.

The Skaven spell Cloud of Corruption is a Direct Damage spell that functions in a similar fashion. ALL friendly or enemy units within 12" of the caster can be affected by the spell, regardless of whether or not they're in combat. You roll a D6 for each unit within 12", on a 2+ that unit takes D6 S5 hits w/no Armor Saves, period. Take note that this spell (or any confusion about its effects) has not been amended or addressed via a query in the latest Skaven or BRB FAQs.

Keep in mind most DD type spells require the casting player to nominate a target. However DoI and CoC are AB spells with special rules that override the BRB. The language isn't the least bit confusing and unlike the Supporting Attacks conflict with the Predatory Fighter rule there's no special language in the BRB dealing with Direct Damage spells that would override an AB rule.

Dokushin
15-08-2013, 18:43
The restriction on targeting is not a property of direct damage spells. The reason direct damage spells must be cast in a forward arc and not in CC is because that is a general property of spells that is circumvented by hexes and augments.

On p31, it's stated that when targeting a spell, "the target must lie within the Wizard's forward arc....Wizards cannot target spells at units engaged in close combat." However, the header for that section states "Targeting restrictions vary from spell to spell. However, unless stated otherwise the following rules apply:"

Deliverance of Itza very clearly states otherwise by stating specifically what the spell targets; therefore it targets what it says it targets. Same argument holds for the EotG.

yeknoMehT
15-08-2013, 18:53
Why is there a difference then for other direct damage spells which say 'target enemy unit within...' - does this mean I can cast them on anything regardless of cc/front arc? The word 'all' is not an exception - it would need to explicitly state that it overrode the cc/front arc requirements. Which it doesn't. Anything else is clutching at imaginary straws.

Dokushin
15-08-2013, 19:03
Why is there a difference then for other direct damage spells which say 'target enemy unit within...' - does this mean I can cast them on anything regardless of cc/front arc? The word 'all' is not an exception - it would need to explicitly state that it overrode the cc/front arc requirements. Which it doesn't. Anything else is clutching at imaginary straws.

Do you have an example of a spell that says "target an enemy unit within"? The spells in the BRB don't say that for direct damage spells; they merely state the range and discuss the effects on the target, without saying what the spell targets. Since nothing is stated otherwise, they use the normal rules, i.e. forward arc and not in combat. (As an example, consider Awakening of the Wood: "Awakening of the Wood is a direct damage spell with a range of 18" and causes D6 Strength 4 hits. If the target is even partially within a forest...").

hamsterwheel
15-08-2013, 20:10
Do you have an example of a spell that says "target an enemy unit within"? The spells in the BRB don't say that for direct damage spells; they merely state the range and discuss the effects on the target, without saying what the spell targets. Since nothing is stated otherwise, they use the normal rules, i.e. forward arc and not in combat. (As an example, consider Awakening of the Wood: "Awakening of the Wood is a direct damage spell with a range of 18" and causes D6 Strength 4 hits. If the target is even partially within a forest...").

Flame Storm
Flame Storm is a direct damage spell. Place the small round template anywhere within 30" of the Wizard - it then scatters D6".

Pit of Shades
Pit of Shades is a direct damage spell. Place the small round template anywhere within 24" - it then scatters D6".

BRB FAQ:
Q: Do ranged direct damage spells that use a template have to target
an enemy unit? (p31)
A: Yes, the template must be placed over the target enemy unit

hamsterwheel
15-08-2013, 20:14
Wow. C'mon guys, this is pretty cut and dry...

'the deliverance of itza is a direct damage spell that targets all enemy units within 12". each target suffers 2d6 S4 hits. if a unit has daemonic undead or nehekaharan undead rules it does 3d6 s4 hits. it can be boosted in range for increased cost 18", 18+; 24", 24+.'

"Targets all enemy units within 12" means there is no target discrepancy or voluntary targeting action required by the controlling player. You cast it and the spell determines the targets, not the player. ALL enemy units within 12", engaged or not, in front, behind or on either side, get hit, period. The word ALL overrides any arc requirements laid down by the BRB.

The Skaven spell Cloud of Corruption is a Direct Damage spell that functions in a similar fashion. ALL friendly or enemy units within 12" of the caster can be affected by the spell, regardless of whether or not they're in combat. You roll a D6 for each unit within 12", on a 2+ that unit takes D6 S5 hits w/no Armor Saves, period. Take note that this spell (or any confusion about its effects) has not been amended or addressed via a query in the latest Skaven or BRB FAQs.

Keep in mind most DD type spells require the casting player to nominate a target. However DoI and CoC are AB spells with special rules that override the BRB. The language isn't the least bit confusing and unlike the Supporting Attacks conflict with the Predatory Fighter rule there's no special language in the BRB dealing with Direct Damage spells that would override an AB rule.

Is Cloud of Corruption classified as a direct damage spell and does it say that it affects units in close combat?

Dokushin
15-08-2013, 20:39
Flame Storm
Flame Storm is a direct damage spell. Place the small round template anywhere within 30" of the Wizard - it then scatters D6".

Pit of Shades
Pit of Shades is a direct damage spell. Place the small round template anywhere within 24" - it then scatters D6".

BRB FAQ:
Q: Do ranged direct damage spells that use a template have to target
an enemy unit? (p31)
A: Yes, the template must be placed over the target enemy unit

Again, those don't mention targets at all, so the target rules from the magic chapter apply (i.e. target an enemy unit within the front arc not in CC). In addition, Direct Damage spells have unique rules for templates specifically, as given in the Direct Damage type section.

These have no bearing on DoI, which does not use a template, and uses unique targeting rules. The BRB specifically allows spells to override targeting rules. DoI supplies an alternate method of targeting.

Adohi-Tehe
15-08-2013, 23:47
I think part of the problem is that the author wanted 'Deliverance of Itza' to be able to be cast through a Skink Priest and to do so would require a special rule in addition to the Arcane Vassal one so they simply made it a direct damage spell. I think further proof of the aforementioned intent is that Kroak has a rule detailing what happens when he miscasts while casting through a Skink Priest. Any Errata changing the spell type to a special or hex spell would therefore require a further Errata to allow the spell to be cast through a Skink Priest. I think the rule should be Read as Intended (RaI), that is to say the spell creates a bubble effect targeting all units within a specified range.

Therefore I concur with the above post by Dokushin and agree that the phrase, 'targets all units within...,' overrides the rule book in the case of 'Deliverance of Itza' (and probably 'Burning Alignment' on the Engine of the Gods if the author carried the logic of, 'all units within...,' over from Kroak). I do, however, concede there is a valid argument to be made against this, though I believe this to be the result of an oversight on the author's part.

Adohi-Tehe

Blkc57
16-08-2013, 00:11
Is Cloud of Corruption classified as a direct damage spell and does it say that it affects units in close combat?

Cloud of Corruption is an older spell from a book with no classification, it really can't be compared to Deliverance, as the Skaven spells all get to benefit from the rule that any spell without a classification uses the targeting directions in it's wording.




Therefore I concur with the above post by Dokushin and agree that the phrase, 'targets all units within...,' overrides the rule book in the case of 'Deliverance of Itza' (and probably 'Burning Alignment' on the Engine of the Gods if the author carried the logic of, 'all units within...,' over from Kroak). I do, however, concede there is a valid argument to be made against this, though I believe this to be the result of an oversight on the author's part.

Adohi-Tehe

The problem is Adohi, is that after I went back and reviewed both the wording of the spell and casting directions in the BRB, it seems Deliverance does not have specific enough wording to allow it to override the basic rules of magic. Hamsterwheel is very correct, until they choose to Errata the spell as a hex, it may not effect any unit outside of front arc, or engaged in close combat.

Dokushin
16-08-2013, 00:27
The problem is Adohi, is that after I went back and reviewed both the wording of the spell and casting directions in the BRB, it seems Deliverance does not have specific enough wording to allow it to override the basic rules of magic. Hamsterwheel is very correct, until they choose to Errata the spell as a hex, it may not effect any unit outside of front arc, or engaged in close combat.

I'm sorry, I simply do not agree with this.

- The BRB states that a spell may provide its own targeting rules.
- The BRB also states that spells target one unit within the front arc not engaged in combat.
- DoI states that it targets all units within a range. This is a clear and direct contradiction of the BRB -- the wording is quite specific.
- Since DoI provides its own targeting rules, and since the BRB allows spells to provide their own targeting rules, the BRB default rules do not apply.

Blkc57
16-08-2013, 00:41
- The BRB states that a spell may provide its own targeting rules.


I understand where you are coming from Dokushin, but that statement you are using on page 31 is in reference to older spells that do not have a spell type, They chose to give Deliverence a spell type of Direct Damage and so its targeting rules are listed on the page.

The exact quote from page 31 is:

"Some unique spells, or spells that are printed in older Warhammer Armies books, do not have a spell type- their text will contain any casting restrictions that apply"

Now if it was very specific to the point of non-discussion one can simply argue that Advanced rules in an Army book override basic rules in the BRB, but I have a hard time reading the wording of Deliverance and seeing that as an explicit declaration.


- The BRB also states that spells target one unit within the front arc not engaged in combat.

Actually is specifically says, Dokushin, that you target enemy units using the restrictions that the targets be in your front arc, within range, and unengaged. The classification of Direct Damage further specifics that the targets must be enemy units and if using a template that it initially during placement can't touch a friendly or engaged units, but it may scatter onto such targets. It doesn't say anything about only targeting one unit in the BRB.

EDIT: in the end this can still be cleared up by GW if all they do in the Errata is either make it clear that Deliverance can target engaged units by saying "all enemy units including engaged units" or even better just keep the wording and change it to a Hex and forget letting a stupid skink priest cast it (like a wimpy Skink can ever be the equal to the Deliverer of Itza). Whether they choose to do so , we must wait and see, it took them months to getting around to Errata for the other 8th edition books like Empire and VC.

Dokushin
16-08-2013, 03:52
I understand where you are coming from Dokushin, but that statement you are using on page 31 is in reference to older spells that do not have a spell type, They chose to give Deliverence a spell type of Direct Damage and so its targeting rules are listed on the page.

The text I'm referring to is actually the (bolded) intro to the CHOOSING A TARGET section, which reads:


Targeting restrictions vary from spell to spell. However, unless stated otherwise the following rules apply:

Followed by the forward arc, range, and CC restrictions -- it's clear that the restrictions are only in place if the spell (regardless of type) provides no alternative.

It's true that the BRB does not explicitly state a single target, although it does state you must choose a target; this is sufficient to show that Deliverance ("target all enemy units") is providing alternative targeting, which is allowed by the BRB as a result of the text quoted above.

I do agree that this demands at least a good FAQ entry and hopefully errata. :)

StarFyreXXX
16-08-2013, 12:39
hopefully the spell can affect units engaged in cc, AND on all sides (not just forward arc). Would really lessen the usefullness of 1 of our few good characters if it's so limited.

FAQ can't get here fast enough *sigh*

Sanjay

Persufflation
16-08-2013, 18:01
This was how I originally interpreted it and was planning on converting/sculpting up a model worthy of this but until an FAQ for this and many other items I will be putting those plans on hold...