PDA

View Full Version : Slann's Burning Head



DeathlessDraich
12-07-2006, 20:36
How would you resolve Burning Head from a Slann in a Temple Guard unit a)not in combat and b)in combat?

I assume that the Slann is accurate enough to cast over the Temple Guard for (a) but I'm not sure.

Thanks.

Ganymede
12-07-2006, 21:14
There are two options.

One: You can disallow the slann from casting said spell since it would strike one of his friendly models.

Two: You can use the rules presented in the WLC entry of the skaven book to deal with this situation.

DeathlessDraich
15-07-2006, 08:02
There are two options.

One: You can disallow the slann from casting said spell since it would strike one of his friendly models..

Thanks Ganymede

LM pg 24 " Slann .. may cast spells as if unengaged ,,, rises on its palanquin above the fighting ... (to cast)"

Does that mean the Slann never strikes his own fighting unit only or the enemy unit fighting as well?




Two: You can use the rules presented in the WLC entry of the skaven book to deal with this situation.

Seems like an agreeable solution. The Warp Lightning Cannon rules is closest in similarity i.e. the player specifies whether 'Burning head' is cast along the ground or above it and over the 2 fighting units but what justification from the rules supports this or would you suggest a dice roll with this as an alternative?
Unfortunately I can only forward suggestions made here to my other club members if there are relevant rules references.

Festus
15-07-2006, 08:48
Hi

I'd say scrap the one Saurus (he is hurt less than 50% anyways) and shoot it like normal....

Of course that means that he may not cast it while in combat, as the BH may not be cast at units in combat IIRC.

Ganymede
17-07-2006, 05:04
Well strictly speaking, the slann just can't cast the spell since the line is not affected by height or anything like that. Just draw a line and everyone under is hit.

Since you can't shoot your own troops, you can't cast the spell in this situation.

As to the Warplightning cannon solution, it is simply one way to handle it. A roll off would work too.


Thanks Ganymede

LM pg 24 " Slann .. may cast spells as if unengaged ,,, rises on its palanquin above the fighting ... (to cast)"

Does that mean the Slann never strikes his own fighting unit only or the enemy unit fighting as well?




Seems like an agreeable solution. The Warp Lightning Cannon rules is closest in similarity i.e. the player specifies whether 'Burning head' is cast along the ground or above it and over the 2 fighting units but what justification from the rules supports this or would you suggest a dice roll with this as an alternative?
Unfortunately I can only forward suggestions made here to my other club members if there are relevant rules references.

mageith
17-07-2006, 05:31
Well strictly speaking, the slann just can't cast the spell since the line is not affected by height or anything like that. Just draw a line and everyone under is hit.

It doesn't exactly say that. You have a paraphrase. The rules don't imply that we "draw a line".

"...shoots 18" from the caster in a straight direct path"

Its a shot or a bullet like head. I'd say its similar to a cannon shot from a hill. It doesn't hit anyone along the way until it hits the ground. Or more like a bolt thrower from higher ground that doesn't hit anything until it hits its target.

We can interpret it to be a straight bullet head shot from the base of the caster but that is an extremely conservative interpretation IMO. Or we can interpret it to be cast from some point higher up on the large target slann from where it most likely would logically be cast from (or imagine him float up to cast). Perhaps an extremely liberal interpretation, but I don't think so.

I say since it can be interpreted to work like its fluff, then interpret it that way.


A roll off would work too.
If it comes to that.

Mage Ith

DeathlessDraich
17-07-2006, 14:03
"...shoots 18" from the caster in a straight direct path"

Or we can interpret it to be cast from some point higher up on the large target slann from where it most likely would logically be cast from
Mage Ith

It's the most acceptable interpretation, I think.

The LM rules state that the Slann "rises above the fighting to cast spells"

Therefore the line for Burning Head starts from above ground and the LM player can specify where it hits the ground and carries on. This has to be past the enemy unit the Temple Guard are fighting against since Burning Head cannot be cast into combat as Ganymede and Festus pointed out.

I imagine it would be a similar line for a Tzeentch sorcerer on a Disc of Tzeentch.

Xyon
17-07-2006, 14:39
I would have to agree, he rises above his temple guard to cast burning skull, which would pass over them and then hit other units as normal.

gortexgunnerson
22-07-2006, 12:02
It's the most acceptable interpretation, I think.

The LM rules state that the Slann "rises above the fighting to cast spells"

Therefore the line for Burning Head starts from above ground and the LM player can specify where it hits the ground and carries on. This has to be past the enemy unit the Temple Guard are fighting against since Burning Head cannot be cast into combat as Ganymede and Festus pointed out.

I imagine it would be a similar line for a Tzeentch sorcerer on a Disc of Tzeentch.

I would agree that the missile should pass above the temple guard and any potentially engaged unit but to allow total free choice on where it hits the ground gives the spell an addition boon which is definately not implied (the spell cast normally hits everything along a path). The Spell should hit the ground at the closest point behond Temple guard and potential engaged unit and then continue. This is closer to the way it would be played if the Slann was a normal unengaged wizard and makes the spell less abusive to sniping.

mageith
22-07-2006, 14:11
The Spell should hit the ground at the closest point behond Temple guard and potential engaged unit and then continue.

The problem with your wording is that the spell is not moving in a direct straight path. It's sort of like this: \____

I suppose since the distance is only 18 inches (the same length as the red rule 'template') (which is also bendable), in actual game play it won't make any difference. I just wouldn't put it so 'in your face'.



This is closer to the way it would be played if the Slann was a normal unengaged wizard and makes the spell less abusive to sniping.
I'm not following this.

Mage Ith

gortexgunnerson
22-07-2006, 14:52
Having reread the spell description I have altered my opinion, about the surrounding unit and a unit in combat. I now think that all models along the path should be hit, Temple guard, engaged in combat and unengaged in combat.

I think the options are;

A) Slann can't cast the spell

B) Slann can cast hit everything in path

C) Slann may choose a single point to hit, i.e. the spell goes in a straight line from the raised position of the slann, hit a point on the ground and continues underground (i.e. no further effect)

D) The Slann may choose a point at which the burninghead reaches ground level and continues

E) The Burning head reaches ground level as soon as gets past the Temple guard

A2) I think the idea the Slann isn't allowed to cast full stop is wrong as their are lots of spells that result in damage to your own units and no rule to counter this, especially as the Temple guard are not the target

B2) I think this is the best answer rules wise as obeys all requirements, also the dimension of hit has been greatly simplified in all other rules case to avoid this problem. In all other queries everything has been resolved at ground level e.g. fanatics versis flyers

C2) I think this is the only answer which considers height and obeys the "straight direct path" element of the rules. However I feel it is behond the complexity of the rules set and Slann only really counts as floating ontop on the Temple guard, it realistic terms he's only just floating above them. Over a distance of a 30m or so the difference in angle would be so small the change in effect would be minimal. But with this ramble I am risking that horror of applying real life to a game and so I repeat again this answer is behond the scope of complexity on which the current fantasy is based.

D2) Has no rules basis and creates an advantage to the slann allowing burning head to be cast over other friendly units like skink skirmishers. Think this falls under Easter egg thinking for the targeting rules for Slann.

E2) Equally has no rules basis in terms of the spell, but feels as if its a comprimise between the targetting rules for Slann and the fact the models effected are in the direct path of the burning head as apposed to under the path.

Overall I think it should be played as hitting everything in the path, being as it closest the effect if the temple guard + slann were removed and replaced with an ordinary wizard. It also follows IMO the intention of the rules which is toi have a spell which doesn't distinquish between friend or foe.

mageith
22-07-2006, 15:09
C) Slann may choose a single point to hit, i.e. the spell goes in a straight line from the raised position of the slann, hit a point on the ground and continues underground (i.e. no further effect)

D) The Slann may choose a point at which the burninghead reaches ground level and continues

E) The Burning head reaches ground level as soon as gets past the Temple guard

Ground level? Is that right on the ground? Where does ground level start? Why have you picked this term? I think it confuses the issue.




B2) I think this is the best answer rules wise as obeys all requirements, also the dimension of hit has been greatly simplified in all other rules case to avoid this problem. In all other queries everything has been resolved at ground level e.g. fanatics versis flyers

All? GW clearly attempts to show that the Slann can cast in the midst of combat (He rises above the combat.). He is also a large target and can see and be seen above the battle. Even if the spell eminates from the Slann's base it won't go through his on unit.

I think your earlier unrevised answer is fine except that the 'in your face' change of direction posits a rule contradiction.



C2) I think this is the only answer which considers height and obeys the "straight direct path" element of the rules. However I feel it is behond the complexity of the rules set and Slann only really counts as floating ontop on the Temple guard, it realistic terms he's only just floating above them. Over a distance of a 30m or so the difference in angle would be so small the change in effect would be minimal. But with this ramble I am risking that horror of applying real life to a game and so I repeat again this answer is behond the scope of complexity on which the current fantasy is based.

We can handle it. Another example. A man-sized skink right behind a unit of three Kroxigors. A unit is on a hill it can see it and shoot it even through real-life geometry would prevent it. Yes we can handle it.



Overall I think it should be played as hitting everything in the path, being as it closest the effect if the temple guard + slann were removed and replaced with an ordinary wizard. It also follows IMO the intention of the rules which is toi have a spell which doesn't distinquish between friend or foe.
Clearly not the right answer. Spells cannot target their own units and cannot shoot into combat.

If the spell was meant to not distinguish between friend/foe, I would hope GW would have made it clearer. I think its a targeting spell since that's the default.

gortexgunnerson
22-07-2006, 18:01
Firstly their is nothing to say you cannot target your own units with non magic missile spells! Spell targetting is usually limited by magic missile works as shooting (i.e. no self target) or but the limitations placed by the spell description.

This has neither, and doesn't require you to target a particular unit. For this spell you choose a direction and hit everything for the first 18" in that direction. I think the word everything clearly defines that the spell will effect anything the burning head passes through

mageith
22-07-2006, 20:34
Firstly their is nothing to say you cannot target your own units with non magic missile spells!

I wouldn't say nothing.

The burning head shoots.

"Players are not allowed to shoot at targets that are engaged in close combat. The risk of hit their own comrades is too high." (60)

Also what it comes to shooting: "Nominate one of your own units that you want to shoot with and select the enemy target..." (58)

The burning head is a somewhat unique spell and so all sorts of outlandish interpretations have come forth over the years. I think shooting one's own troops would fall into that category. YMMV

In addition, most spells tell you what you can target. The BH is less clear. Personally I consider it a template. But nearly everything about the BH is debatable.



Spell targetting is usually limited by magic missile works as shooting (i.e. no self target) or but the limitations placed by the spell description.

Not entirely. Spell casting has its own setting of requirements. "To cast a spell, a Wizard chooses and nominates one of his spells to cast and then declares the target of the spell." (136) I can't see anything in the BH that allows the caster not to name the target.

And once a target is named, it must be legal. I'd say your own troops are not legal unless you're playing Skaven.



This has neither, and doesn't require you to target a particular unit.

A target doesn't have to be unit. See my quote above.



For this spell you choose a direction and hit everything for the first 18" in that direction. I think the word everything clearly defines that the spell will effect anything the burning head passes through
It does but a player cannot deliberately target their own models unless specifically allowed to.

Perhaps. Its another way out of the quagmire but I think its pushing the envelope.

However, you may have me on this one because I can't find a direct and definitive reference that prohibits the targeting of one's own units who aren't in combat. :(

The closest is the one I already quoted on 58 and for that to hold we must agree that the BH is shooting (in addition to being a spell).

Maybe someone else has something?

Mage Ith