PDA

View Full Version : Banishment



CaptainAwesome
12-09-2014, 23:21
So, Banishment the 5th spell from the lore of light.

A common tactic is to have a level four wizard with a number of level one wizards nearby that all use the lore of light as it boosts the strength of the spell.

Reading the rules for banishment it states that the strength of the spell is "equal to 4 plus the number of wizards that know spells from the lore of light within 12" of the caster..." emphasis mine. (page 495 of the large warhammer rule book)

Now surely rules as written a level one wizard cannot boost the strength of banishment as they do not know SPELLS (plural) they know A SPELL (singular).

Similarly bound spells of Banishment would not work as a "wizard" does not know the spell.


Am I right or have i missed something or an FAQ?

MOMUS
12-09-2014, 23:37
Light council beats all



/thread

thesoundofmusica
13-09-2014, 00:25
Similarly bound spells of Banishment would not work as a "wizard" does not know the spell.


This is correct. Although I haven't heard anyone claim otherwise. The Altar banishment benefits from the wizards around it, nobody benefits from the Altar.

Edit: The rulebook keeps referring to 'spells' through the entire book for example page 28 says a wizard is: "models that can cast spells". Are you suggesting then that knowing only a single spell doesnt make you a wizard?

EvanM
13-09-2014, 00:44
level ones count for contributing strength. dont be a rules lawyer. with something that weird the writers obviously only meant that you needed to take lore of light or be for instance the loremaster of hoeth who knows all the sig spells.

if not then everyone has been playing it wrong.

FatTrucker
13-09-2014, 13:58
Surely the plurality is applied because there is more than one spell available in the Lore of Light.
It refers to a number of wizards. In the context of the statement a number of level 1 wizards would know spells (plural) from the Lore of Light.

Mr_Rose
13-09-2014, 17:01
Surely the plurality is applied because there is more than one spell available in the Lore of Light.
It refers to a number of wizards. In the context of the statement a number of level 1 wizards would know spells (plural) from the Lore of Light.
Yeah, this. It's a quirk of English that only the truly singular takes the singular grammatical case. Everything else is plural, even zero and the unknown.

FatTrucker
14-09-2014, 07:43
well if zero is plural than ANY WIZARD knows ZERO spells so then ANY wizard even say lore of fire ones would be giving you +1 to the S. is that what you truly want to happen, mr rules lawyer?

He's not talking about the rules, he's talking about the use of language and the forms in which a plural is applied which is absolutely relevant. No need to be pedantic. Particularly since the issue has been resolved.

Also what you wrote doesn't make sense even in the context of what's being discussed.

Tae
14-09-2014, 09:21
well if zero is plural than ANY WIZARD knows ZERO spells so then ANY wizard even say lore of fire ones would be giving you +1 to the S. is that what you truly want to happen, mr rules lawyer?

Well done for come telly misunderstanding what he was saying.

His point was that zero uses the plural (e.g, he knows zero spells (correct) instead of he knows zero spell (incorrect)), therefore making any rules decision based on the use/non-use of the plural form won't mean crap since it's use in English language isn't as precise as some other words.

Arthain
14-09-2014, 09:25
You don't need to revert to language usage and whatnot. On armylists entries, it says, for every wizard: ... is a LvX Wizard who knows spells from the Lore of XXXXXX...

I'm sure that for Battle Mages it says that they are Lv1 Wizards who know spells from one of the eight Rulebook Lores, or something similar.

So the case is covered. Of course War Altar doesn't count, just like a Hierotitan or a River of Light wouldn't either.