Casting restrictions, and old books

[Texhnolyze]

Hey guys!

So the old books got no classification of their spells I got that, but they still have to follow the general guidelines for casting right?

For example, Infernal Gateway can't be cast into combat, because the BRB has a general rule concerning spells stating "the wizards cannot target spells at units engaged in close combat". Even thought Infernal gateway just states "pick an enemy unit, if that unit is within range" as its restriction.

Did I get this right ?

[theunwantedbeing]

Yes and no.

House rule it, there isn't an official answer and so far it's looking like there never will be.

[Texhnolyze]

Yes and no.

House rule it, there isn't an official answer and so far it's looking like there never will be.

That FAQ pdf, didn't really help me

I know that you cant classify the old spells, and I'm fine with that. But the general casting restrictions has nothing to do with what class the spell is^^

Oo well...

[T10]

Hey guys!

So the old books got no classification of their spells I got that, but they still have to follow the general guidelines for casting right?

Did I get this right ?

Yes. Also note that even among the current basic eight lores there are "unclassified" spells that must respect the basic magic rules.

[theunwantedbeing]

Yes. Also note that even among the current basic eight lores there are "unclassified" spells that must respect the basic magic rules.

Plenty of people will outright refuse to agree to this.
Largely as it states that the spells from the earlier books contain any casting restrictions.

It needs an FAQ.

[Texhnolyze]

Plenty of people will outright refuse to agree to this.
Largely as it states that the spells from the earlier books contain any casting restrictions.

It needs an FAQ.

It states that since they dont have a type, they will contain any casting restrictions. But isn't this is about the restrictions that come with being a certain type of spel? It does not read like it allows the old books to ignore all restrictions when casting spells.

They can not circumvent the general restrictions that will applies to all spells, it doesn't matter if they are old, new, hex or direct damage, the general restrictions affects them all.

The types modifies these restrictions, like augments can be cast into combat.

But old books does not have these types, so you have to get any additional restrictions that modify the general blanket restrictions from the spell description, like "shield of asyrian" that allows it to be cast into combat.

[T10]

Plenty of people will outright refuse to agree to this.
Largely as it states that the spells from the earlier books contain any casting restrictions.

It needs an FAQ.

Bah. Plenty of people will just need to be told they are wrong.

[Lord Inquisitor]

This comes up regularly.

"Unless stated otherwise the following rules apply:" [Foward Arc, no LOS, Range, not into combat]
"Some spells have a type that enforces additional casting restrictions or waives others."
"Some unique spells, or spells that are printed in older Warhammer Armies books, do not have a type - their text will contain any casting restrictions that apply."

The argument is that unique and older book spells contain any casting restrictions that apply. Unfortunately, the 7th edition rules specified that spells cannot be cast into combat unless the spell specifies otherwise within the core rules. Which allows people to say that spells that previously couldn't be cast into combat now can be, because they are exempt from the standard restrictions. Applying the basic restrictions to all pre-8th spells is a reasonable solution, but it does inflict the "forward arc" restriction on spells that previously didn't have it.

[Asensur]

Apply old restrictions until the FAQ is updated (last update was on December, right?)

[Texhnolyze]

This comes up regularly.

"Unless stated otherwise the following rules apply:" [Foward Arc, no LOS, Range, not into combat]
"Some spells have a type that enforces additional casting restrictions or waives others."
"Some unique spells, or spells that are printed in older Warhammer Armies books, do not have a type - their text will contain any casting restrictions that apply."

The argument is that unique and older book spells contain any casting restrictions that apply. Unfortunately, the 7th edition rules specified that spells cannot be cast into combat unless the spell specifies otherwise within the core rules. Which allows people to say that spells that previously couldn't be cast into combat now can be, because they are exempt from the standard restrictions. Applying the basic restrictions to all pre-8th spells is a reasonable solution, but it does inflict the "forward arc" restriction on spells that previously didn't have it.

This just tells me that you can not apply any of the "type" specific casting restrictions on the old spells. For example, you cant say that Black horror is a vortex spell.

So the old spells are excluded from any type specific casting restrictions (hex, vortex, DD, augument, ect..). But are they excluded from the general blanket restrictions that affect every spell in the game?
The rule book gives the general casting rules. Then it goes over to talk about types, and when talking about types it tells you what to do with typeless spells. It does not tell you to ignore the general casting restrictions.

Ooo well, seems this will not be settled.

[Lord Inquisitor]

That is, I think, the most sensible conclusion, if on shaky RAW ground. That does, however, make pre-8th spells less potent than intended. Infernal Gateway, for example, was intended to be used anywhere within range, but not into combat. If you apply the standard restrictions, it is now only forward arc. If you don't, it is now castable into combat.