Ran into this in a tournament the other day, the judge agrees with me but its still a point of contention that I havent found an answer for.
When you cast a boosted RIP spell, Transformation of Kadon for instance, do you dispel on the modified casting value in subsequent turns or the actual minimum of the unmodified spell?
The BRB states the phrase "minimum casting value" but there's a case to argue this both ways. I say its the original minimum, since that is the minimum to cast the actual spell, even if the spells effects have been boosted.

If the cast needs 18 to cast the spell then the spell is dispelled on a 18+, if it is upgraded to the larger effect that needs say 20+ to cast then it will also need 20+ to dispell
It is the casting spells minimum casting value and if they note that they are trying to cast the 20+ version then they have stated what spell they want to cast and it's minimum value, which is 20+
Is that what you are talking about?

Think about it in the terms of Fireball: you pick the 18+ and the opponents lvl 2 would only need to roll 4 to dispell it at the minimum casting value of 5+? That would be beyond ridiculous lol.

syanticraven wrote:Think about it in the terms of Fireball: you pick the 18+ and the opponents lvl 2 would only need to roll 4 to dispell it at the minimum casting value of 5+? That would be beyond ridiculous lol.

Worst example ever, as we're talkin RIP dispelling wich is different to everything else.
That being said, if you use the "boosted Transformation of Kadon"(20+), then it is later dispelled with the minimum casting value for a that, not the one for "Transformation of Kadon"(16+).
(Quotes added to better show what i mean.)

HoverBoy wrote:

syanticraven wrote:Think about it in the terms of Fireball: you pick the 18+ and the opponents lvl 2 would only need to roll 4 to dispell it at the minimum casting value of 5+? That would be beyond ridiculous lol.

Worst example ever, as we're talkin RIP dispelling wich is different to everything else.
That being said, if you use the "boosted Transformation of Kadon"(20+), then it is later dispelled with the minimum casting value for a that, not the one for "Transformation of Kadon"(16+).
(Quotes added to better show what i mean.)

"I said is that what you are talking about?" implying that I was unsure what he said so my example may not fit the situation if I got it wrong. My ruling was still correct however.
As a remain in play spell is the same to dispell as any other spell except that it can be done every turn after it has been successfully cast and is not dispelled to equal or more then the casters roll but on the minimum casting value. Which the OP already knows.


Edit: fething spelling.

HoverBoy wrote:

syanticraven wrote:Think about it in the terms of Fireball: you pick the 18+ and the opponents lvl 2 would only need to roll 4 to dispell it at the minimum casting value of 5+? That would be beyond ridiculous lol.

Worst example ever, as we're talkin RIP dispelling wich is different to everything else.
That being said, if you use the "boosted Transformation of Kadon"(20+), then it is later dispelled with the minimum casting value for a that, not the one for "Transformation of Kadon"(16+).
(Quotes added to better show what i mean.)

RIP spells only require the basic casting level to dispel as per pg 36. There is no such spell as a "Boosted Transformation of Kadon". It is Transformation of Kadon, which would need a 16+.

Davall wrote:

HoverBoy wrote:

syanticraven wrote:Think about it in the terms of Fireball: you pick the 18+ and the opponents lvl 2 would only need to roll 4 to dispell it at the minimum casting value of 5+? That would be beyond ridiculous lol.

Worst example ever, as we're talkin RIP dispelling wich is different to everything else.
That being said, if you use the "boosted Transformation of Kadon"(20+), then it is later dispelled with the minimum casting value for a that, not the one for "Transformation of Kadon"(16+).
(Quotes added to better show what i mean.)

RIP spells only require the basic casting level to dispel as per pg 36. There is no such spell as a "Boosted Transformation of Kadon". It is Transformation of Kadon, which would need a 16+.

"Remain In Play spells do not retain the energy to their casting, and so a wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll if attempting to dispel in subsequent turns, but rather the minimum casting value listed in the spells description. (so there is no need to make note of each spells casting roll)."

Not the basic casting level. The minimum casting level of said spell and if you pick said spell with minimum cost of 20+ to cast the spell (which is noted in the spells description) then it requires 20+ to dispel it. The Upper levels of spells count as having a minimum dispel as their casting value. As they take more power to cast therefore more power to dispel.

If a wizard picks to cast the second (boosted) version of the spell you cannot pick to dispel the first version as it has not actually been cast.

ya, that's the thing; there's a minimum casting value to a boosted spell and then there's the actual minimum to the spell itself. According to the section on dispelling RIP, the minimum is used because much of the spells potency is faded after the initial casting. But that's not exactly conclusive.

Leith wrote:ya, that's the thing; there's a minimum casting value to a boosted spell and then there's the actual minimum to the spell itself. According to the section on dispelling RIP, the minimum is used because much of the spells potency is faded after the initial casting. But that's not exactly conclusive.

Well it says "Remain In Play spells do not retain the energy to their casting, and so a wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll if attempting to dispel in subsequent turns...(so there is no need to make note of each spells casting roll)."
I.e. if you roll 4 dice and get 24 to cast (and lets say you are a level 4) that is an overall casting value of 28 but due to the rule I posted above, the extra score is ignored and is reset to the spells (the spell that was cast) minimum casting value. Which would reset it back to 20, THE spell that was casts minimum casting value was 20+ not 16+.

If it helps think of it this way if the Spells potency had indeed faded the next turn then the model under the influence of Transmutation of Kadon would have to revert from a Mountain Chimera or Great Fire dragon down to something in the lower level like a Horned dragon or black hydra

No, the spell is a 16+. The 20+ is just a variant of the spell.

The simplest question is, what is the minimum casting value of the listed spell? 16+.

There is only one spell called X. It has a minimum casting value of Y. You can also do Z for an extra effect. The minimum value is still Y.

Davall wrote:No, the spell is a 16+. The 20+ is just a variant of the spell.

The simplest question is, what is the minimum casting value of the listed spell? 16+.

There is only one spell called X. It has a minimum casting value of Y. You can also do Z for an extra effect. The minimum value is still Y.

It is minimum casting value of casted spell.

And that is not it, you have to designate what cast you are rolling for (in which also designates the minimum casting value of the spell) if you pick the lower level of 16+ and roll 20+ the spell does not gain an extra effect. There is one spell you choose which minimum casting value you want for it. That in turn decides its minimum dispel value.

It also explains why in the next turn the remain in play spell does not revert to the lower level of the spell. because it retains the pwer of the orginal casted spell

No where in the magic section when it discusses casting spells at an enhanced value does it mention the higher number is the minimum casting value. It only says casting value.

Minimum means the lowest amount, which is the rock bottom, unmodified amount of (in this case) 16+.

Don't gloss over the word minimum.

if I pick the boosted spell (as described in the rules I must pick what version first) and roll get a score of 16-19 I still fail the spell, it is a minimum of 20 needed to cast the spell. Which is outlined by calling it a casting value of 20+ and the fact it fails if I get 16-19

The important word in the rules is not minimum as there are 2 minimum values, 1 for each part of the spell. The important and deciding word is spell. Does it stand for the base spell or the spell you cast. There is a clear difference between which version you cast or else it would not require you to pick with version you are casting.

I would argue that it is the spell you actually cast. As it would take more power to dispel a more powerful version of the spell.

syanticraven wrote:if I pick the boosted spell (as described in the rules I must pick what version first) and roll get a score of 16-19 I still fail the spell, it is a minimum of 20 needed to cast the spell. Which is outlined by calling it a casting value of 20+ and the fact it fails if I get 16-19

And that is the part that makes me agree with you. The book makes you distinguish between casting the normal version or the boosted; you don't simply try to cast the spell and if you get a bigger number you get a better version, you have to designate that you're casting the boosted one.

"rather the minimum casting value listed in the spells description. "

There are multiple casting values listed in the description - only one of them is the minimum.

You use the lowest value in that spell's description, regardless of whether you cast the boosted version or not.

Killjoy00 wrote:"rather the minimum casting value listed in the spells description. "

There are multiple casting values listed in the description - only one of them is the minimum.

You use the lowest value in that spell's description, regardless of whether you cast the boosted version or not.

They are both minimum, minimum means the smallest value needed to cast the spell.

The smallest value needed to cast the spell is decided by the player before he rolls for said spell.
This is why you cannot declare you are casting the boosted version of Transmutation of kadon and then count it as passed on a 16+ and getting the lower effect as the minimum casting for the spell has now become 20+ which remains in play as the players choice of 20+ not reverting to the weaker version or else the spells effect would drop to the lower version aswell.

syanticraven wrote:

They are both minimum, minimum means the smallest value needed to cast the spell.

Incorrect. It clearly refers to the minimum in the spell's description. Minimum means lowest, and there's only value that can be a minimum in the description.

Your counterexample is not appropriate. Casting a spell follows the rules for casting - dispelling a remains in play follows its own rules. Those rules clearly say the minimum value in the description, which can only be one value.

I believe syanticraven has it right here.

It's fairly logical to assume if I need 20+ to cast, in subsequent turns you would need 20+ to dispel. I don't see what the problem is.

Killjoy00 wrote:

syanticraven wrote:

They are both minimum, minimum means the smallest value needed to cast the spell.

Incorrect. It clearly refers to the minimum in the spell's description. Minimum means lowest, and there's only value that can be a minimum in the description.

Your counterexample is not appropriate. Casting a spell follows the rules for casting - dispelling a remains in play follows its own rules. Those rules clearly say the minimum value in the description, which can only be one value.

the "Minimum casting value" the spells minimum casting value is 16+ unless however the caster picked the boosted spell in which case according to the spell "the casting value increases to 20+" which means while in play that spells casting value of 16+ is modified to 20+ and therefore the spells (as in the spell in play) minimum casting value is 20+. You are dispelling that specific cast spell.

Also as the spell is a 'remain in play' that modified effect is also 'remain in play' which means every time you look at that number in reference to that specific cast the number is modified to 20+ until it is dispelled.

Unfortunately the rules don't say you dispel "the specific cast spell."

The rule is:

"Remain In Play spells do not retain the energy to their casting, and so a wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll if attempting to dispel in subsequent turns, but rather the minimum casting value listed in the spells description. (so there is no need to make note of each spells casting roll)."


There is no need to make note of anything. They do not retain their energy. And most importantly, you have to beat the minimum casting value in the "spell's description."

The spell cast is Transformation of Kadon. Look at the description of that spell. It has multiple casting values. One of them is the minimum.

In other word, your explanation makes the word "minimum" in the rule superfluous. Under your reasoning, it could say "but rather the casting value listed in the spell's description." It does not say that. It says minimum casting value and therefore you use exactly that, the minimum value.

I don't see anywhere that they are "boosted spells" other then where Throne of Vines makes several life spells improved. Say Transformation of Khadon again, I see 2 seperate spells with 2 seperate casting values that do 2 completely different things. I don't see where the fireball example was terrible it is saying the exact same thing. You wouldn't get to dispel the 3d6 48" fire ball with a 5, so there is no way you can dispel the 20+ transformation at anytime for less then a roll of 20+ because that is the minimum casting value for that spell. The only thing the "minimum" and "don't retain the energy to their casting" means is if someone rolls a 26 to cast a spell that you need a 20+ for and it remains in play you won't need a 26 to dispel it just the minimum 20+ that it cast on.

Killjoy00 wrote:Unfortunately the rules don't say you dispel "the specific cast spell."

The rule is:

"Remain In Play spells do not retain the energy to their casting, and so a wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll if attempting to dispel in subsequent turns, but rather the minimum casting value listed in the spells description. (so there is no need to make note of each spells casting roll)."


There is no need to make note of anything. They do not retain their energy. And most importantly, you have to beat the minimum casting value in the "spell's description."

The spell cast is Transformation of Kadon. Look at the description of that spell. It has multiple casting values. One of them is the minimum.

In other word, your explanation makes the word "minimum" in the rule superfluous. Under your reasoning, it could say "but rather the casting value listed in the spell's description." It does not say that. It says minimum casting value and therefore you use exactly that, the minimum value.

They say "the spell". Which is the specific cast spell. Otherwise I would then use fireballs casting value.

They do not retain their energy is the ruling retaining to the fact it is reset to minimum casting value instead of having to roll a possible 44+. Hence the ", and so a wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll if attempting to dispel in subsequent turns"

My explanation is pretty straight forward in the spells description it notes that if the caster picks the boosted spell, that the casting value is increased to 20+ (making the minimum casting value 20+). That means that during this spells cast and activation and duration that 16+ does not exist, it has been increased to 20+.


Oh also sol, we are refering to pg 34 in the top right hand corner is a box about 'boosted' spells it just says that some spells have different versions and it must be noted which version of the spell is being cast before the di are rolled.

There is one spell named Transformation of Kadon. It has one description, on pg. 493. When a wizard rolls for spells, if he rolls a 6 he gets that one spell, named Transformation of Kadon. In that one spell's single description, there are multiple casting values. One of those values is the minimum casting value in the description of that spell. That value is 16. That value is the value used to dispel the spell.

You haven't answered why it says you don't need to make note of what spell you cast, and you haven't answered why the word minimum wouldn't be superfluous.

You honestly think that if someone casts Doom and Darkness from 30 inches away, you have to dispel that spell on a 13+? If someone casts The Withering from 30 inches away, you have to dispel on a 16+? Both would mean you have to "make note" of which spell it was when it was cast, which is specifically contradicted by the rules.

Killjoy00 wrote:There is one spell named Transformation of Kadon. It has one description, on pg. 493. When a wizard rolls for spells, if he rolls a 6 he gets that one spell, named Transformation of Kadon. In that one spell's single description, there are multiple casting values. One of those values is the minimum casting value in the description of that spell. That value is 16. That value is the value used to dispel the spell.

You haven't answered why it says you don't need to make note of what spell you cast, and you haven't answered why the word minimum wouldn't be superfluous.

You honestly think that if someone casts Doom and Darkness from 30 inches away, you have to dispel that spell on a 13+? If someone casts The Withering from 30 inches away, you have to dispel on a 16+? Both would mean you have to "make note" of which spell it was when it was cast, which is specifically contradicted by the rules.

Sorry I missed that question. But the fact it is says pg43 'Boosted spells' that you must designate which spell you are casting before hand, which is making note of the spell you are casting "Note that if the controlling player does not state otherwise before rolling the dice, a wizard is assumed to be casting the standard version of the spell" By verbally stating you are casting a Boosted spell you have taken note of it. and I dont need to answer the other question it is obvious what it means and states.

minimum it picks the Minimum value which in the case is 16+ unless the caster specifically picked the boosted spell and the rules of the spell specifically note that "the casting value increases to 20+"

There is only 1 casting value. That casting value is 16+ if you designate the stronger spell it is increased to 20+ that is not 2 values, it is 1 value being increased. If it was 2 casting values it would be 16+ but on the roll of 20+ X happens.

"If he does so the casting value is increased to 13+" there is that all important sentence again. Yes I fully believe that to dispel it you must roll a 13+ unless done during the casting of the spell, in which case you have to beat the casters roll. As it is noted that the value 10+ is now increases to 13+, also if withering has "If he does so the casting value is increased to X+" then yes.

As I mentioned you need to verbally mention/designate/note what version of the spell you are casting. Also it is only a contradiction of the rules if it states that you MUST not take a note of the spell, the rules say you do not have to take a note of spells. However in the boosted spell section it says you must verbally note. They are known as basic and advance rules. An advance rules always over runs the general rule.

"Remain In Play spells do not retain the energy to their casting, and so a wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll if attempting to dispel in subsequent turns, but rather the minimum casting value listed in the spells description. "


Transformation of Kadon rules:

"The wizard can choose to cast a more powerful version of the spell and become a Mountain Chimera or a Great Dragon [This is the spell description].If he does so, the casting value increases to 20+ [This is the minimum casting value that goes with the spells description].



td;dr: You dispel the spell on the value you cast it on.

syanticraven wrote:

Sorry I missed that question. But the fact it is says pg43 'Boosted spells' that you must designate which spell you are casting before hand, which is making note of the spell you are casting "Note that if the controlling player does not state otherwise before rolling the dice, a wizard is assumed to be casting the standard version of the spell" By verbally stating you are casting a Boosted spell you have taken note of it. and I dont need to answer the other question it is obvious what it means and states.

I'm about done here, but you are once again misrepresenting the rules. Boosted spells is on pg. 32 of my book, but it specifically says pick which version of the spell you are casting. It is not a different spell. It is one spell, with one description, which has one minimum casting value. Similarly to your misrepresentation Boymac - you are selectively quoting the Transformation of kadon rules to edit out the other, minimum casting value.

The rules say you dispel on the "minimum casting value in the spell's description." These spells are one spell, with one description and with one minimum casting value. No amount of semantics on your part can change this.

Killjoy00 wrote:
The rules say you dispel on the "minimum casting value in the spell's description." These spells are one spell, with one description and with one minimum casting value. No amount of semantics on your part can change this.

BoyMac wrote:
Transformation of Kadon rules:

"The wizard can choose to cast a more powerful version of the spell and become a Mountain Chimera or a Great Dragon [This is the spell description].If he does so, the casting value increases to 20+ [This is the minimum casting value that goes with the spells description].

Rules written as above would be dispelled on the casting value of the level you cast it on.

Killjoy00 wrote:

syanticraven wrote:

Sorry I missed that question. But the fact it is says pg43 'Boosted spells' that you must designate which spell you are casting before hand, which is making note of the spell you are casting "Note that if the controlling player does not state otherwise before rolling the dice, a wizard is assumed to be casting the standard version of the spell" By verbally stating you are casting a Boosted spell you have taken note of it. and I dont need to answer the other question it is obvious what it means and states.

I'm about done here, but you are once again misrepresenting the rules. Boosted spells is on pg. 32 of my book, but it specifically says pick which version of the spell you are casting. It is not a different spell. It is one spell, with one description, which has one minimum casting value. Similarly to your misrepresentation Boymac - you are selectively quoting the Transformation of kadon rules to edit out the other, minimum casting value.

The rules say you dispel on the "minimum casting value in the spell's description." These spells are one spell, with one description and with one minimum casting value. No amount of semantics on your part can change this.

It is you who is arguing semantics. I quoted the rules perfectly and then said version after I said spell. It was as clear as day that I meant version anyway.

However you are ignoring the spells advance rule that says "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+" The Spells description notes the casting value is 16+ unless it was the more powerful version that was cast. The Spell is 1 spell, with 1 value. That value is dependant on the version of the spell you cast. As the rule book does in fact say "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+" that means that the minimum casting value for the spell is now increases to 20+ as ANY casting value needed is the minimum casting value as without reaching said casting value the spell is not cast.

It cannot be any clearer "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+"

syanticraven wrote: The Spell is 1 spell, with 1 value. That value is dependant on the version of the spell you cast.

This is where you keep tripping up. The minimum value IN THE DESCRIPTION actually can't change. No matter how many times you read the description for the spell "Transformation of kadon" there will only be 1 minimum in there.

Killjoy00 wrote:

syanticraven wrote: The Spell is 1 spell, with 1 value. That value is dependant on the version of the spell you cast.

This is where you keep tripping up. The minimum value IN THE DESCRIPTION actually can't change. No matter how many times you read the description for the spell "Transformation of kadon" there will only be 1 minimum in there.

In the description is "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+".
Increasing something is changing it.

Once said "I am casting the boosted version of X spell" The minimum casting value is changed. It cannot be called a secondary or intermediate casting value as the minimum needed to pass the spell has now changed. Which makes it the new minimum casting value for said spell.

@ Killjoy00.
Please stop you're emarassing yourself.

Shrug. Nos will be here soon and I'm 95% sure she'll agree with me. I'm surprised at you Hover, you're usually better on the RaW than this.

Killjoy00 wrote:Shrug. Nos will be here soon and I'm 95% sure she'll agree with me. I'm surprised at you Hover, you're usually better on the RaW than this.

Listen to yourself you are acting like the higher authority. This is a discussion on a rule not a battle.

But if you want to argue RAW then read the description where is says "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+" you cannot mention RAW and leave out an important sentence like that. "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+" is part of the rules.

Bah. Everyone knows nos is the highest authority, that was my point.

Killjoy00 wrote:Shrug. Nos will be here soon and I'm 95% sure he'll agree with me. I'm surprised at you Hover, you're usually better on the RaW than this.

Fixed that for you!

Minimum casting value in the description is pretty clear - there is a single description of the spell, even if the spell has different versions with different power levels you still have 1 description on which you must find the minimum casting value.

Therefore, to my reading you dispel on a 16+

(Oh, and possible standard maximum (i.e. no IF) is 35, barring extra boosts like Tzeentch bonuses - 5x5, 1x6, +4 for level 4)

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Killjoy00 wrote:Shrug. Nos will be here soon and I'm 95% sure he'll agree with me. I'm surprised at you Hover, you're usually better on the RaW than this.

Fixed that for you!

Minimum casting value in the description is pretty clear - there is a single description of the spell, even if the spell has different versions with different power levels you still have 1 description on which you must find the minimum casting value.

Therefore, to my reading you dispel on a 16+

(Oh, and possible standard maximum (i.e. no IF) is 35, barring extra boosts like Tzeentch bonuses - 5x5, 1x6, +4 for level 4)

I would still argue that due to the inclusion of "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+" in that 1 description that you abide by its rules and increase 16+ to 20+ until the spell is removed from play in some way or form.

But there is still only ONE minimum value in the ONE description - the word "minimum" is entirely redundant if what you were saying happened to be true, there is no point in it existing int he phrase.

One description, one possible minimum value in the description taken as a whole. Slightly counter intuitive but perhaps simply an extension of the "fading power" idea of why it is at base casting cost in the first place.

nosferatu1001 wrote:But there is still only ONE minimum value in the ONE description - the word "minimum" is entirely redundant if what you were saying happened to be true, there is no point in it existing int he phrase.

One description, one possible minimum value in the description taken as a whole. Slightly counter intuitive but perhaps simply an extension of the "fading power" idea of why it is at base casting cost in the first place.

It would have to state the minimum casting value, as 'the casting value' would be what ever the player rolled to cast the spell, would it not?
I also thought it may have been the fading power idea, but then in this case the effect of the spell in the next turn would have of also revert to the original base spell as there is no longer enough power to keep the boosted effect in play if it was to coincide with the ruling.

This is why by my logic, the way I read the rule and 'the spirit of the game' that the rulebook mentions so much that it is the way I think. As logically speaking a higher powered spell would need a higher power dispel. If the power faded the effect would also have to fade. and also the inclusion of "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+" which states that after choosing the boosted version, the minimum casting value has now been increased to a minimum of 20+.

No, because the casting value IN THE DESCRIPTION is whatever "+" value you were required to beat - not the casting *roll*, which is different to the value required to cast the spell.

The idea behind the "power fade" is that the wizard doesnt need much power to keep a spell going - like overcoming inertia, once you have something rolling you only need a small motive force to keep it rolling. So you needed a big boost to get the higher result, but maintaining the higher result requires no more effort than the lower value.

While you are correct that the minimum casting value has been raised while casting, the minimum casting value in *the* description has remained the same.

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, because the casting value IN THE DESCRIPTION is whatever "+" value you were required to beat - not the casting *roll*, which is different to the value required to cast the spell.

The idea behind the "power fade" is that the wizard doesnt need much power to keep a spell going - like overcoming inertia, once you have something rolling you only need a small motive force to keep it rolling. So you needed a big boost to get the higher result, but maintaining the higher result requires no more effort than the lower value.

I have a feeling that the "power fade" is more to the point of if you roll something like 30 for the spell you, in subsequent turns, don't have to try and dispel it at 30, but it's casting value.

Wow this is horrible, sorry, but you people saying that you can dispel the 20+ Khadon on a 16+ are way way wrong and have some serious read comprehension problems. You are wrong. Hopefully some of these so called higher powers will come and delete or lock this thread.

Sol wrote:Wow this is horrible, sorry, but you people saying that you can dispel the 20+ Khadon on a 16+ are way way wrong and have some serious read[ing] comprehension problems. You are wrong. Hopefully some of these so called higher powers will come and delete or lock this thread.

I'm quite sure none of the above thread required any question of people's reading comprehension skills nor a "call-to-arms" of moderation to lock or much less delete the thread. While there's certainly an ongoing disagreement, there has been very little to no mudslinging until your post.

I am personally inclined to agree that RaW you must match the minimum casting value of the version of the spell cast. Transformation into a dragon or chimera has a very different description associated with its 20+ minimum casting value than the transformation into a lesser creature description that is associated with a 16+ casting value. RaW advises us to use the minimum casting value per the spell's description. As previously noted both in this and prior posts, the description for the 20+ Transformation (or boosted version of any spell for that matter) is different than the lesser version. You did not cast a 16+ and follow the description of the 20+ spell. You threw a 20+ and followed the description of the 20+ spell. The minimum casting value of that boosted spell description is 20+.

My question to those who believe you could dispel a boosted spell on the lesser value is if you would actually play it that way in the game. Would you allow someone to dispel your large-template Purple Sun on a 15+? I know I'd have a few concerns with allowing that to pass.

Kirbinator wrote:

the description for the 20+ Transformation (or boosted version of any spell for that matter) is different than the lesser version.

This is incorrect. There is only one description for the "spell" Transformation of kadon. A spell is one of the entries on the charts, of which a wizard typically gets one of per his wizard level. If Transformation were two spells, then you would have to use two of your choices to get both versions. You don't. That's why I kept reiterating that it is one spell. Since it is one spell, it has one description. And in that description, there are multiple casting values. Of which one is the minimum.

Again, the word minimum has meaning. If your explanation was correct, they could have said "the casting value in the description of the spell." If there were multiple descriptions in each single spell, then you would simply look to the casting value, which would be 20+. They didn't say that, they said minimum. That necessarily implies multiple casting values. There are two casting values in the spell Transformation of Kadon. One is 16 and one is 20. One of those is the minimum.

Kirbinator wrote:
My question to those who believe you could dispel a boosted spell on the lesser value is if you would actually play it that way in the game. Would you allow someone to dispel your large-template Purple Sun on a 15+? I know I'd have a few concerns with allowing that to pass.

I have let someone do that and had no concerns. Would you really have to beat a 13+ to dispel Doom and Darkness just because the opposing wizard was 25 inches away when he cast it? I'd have a few concerns allowing that to pass.

Killjoy00 wrote:Would you really have to beat a 13+ to dispel Doom and Darkness just because the opposing wizard was 25 inches away when he cast it? I'd have a few concerns allowing that to pass.

At first glance that's a very good point, but a boosted spell does not necessarily mean the potency is augmented. It is no less an augmented version of the spell though. You have a very good point but I still feel the enhanced range of the boosted spell is part of the separate description. So yes, you would have to match the boosted value to dispel a long-range D&D under that mentality.

If the difference between the minimum and boosted values were not a part of the description of the spell, how would you know what you were casting? Each 8th ed spell does not have a single description. Yes, they are a single spell, but there are two descriptions. How about hexes where the base version of the spell curses a single unit, but the boosted curses every unit within range? Do you simply meet the casting value of the base version and dispel all instances of the hex from the board?

What allows a boosted fireball to get extra hits? What allows a boosted Doom & Darkness to go further? The final effect of the spell is nearly always similar between the two, but the description of the boosted version of the spell is separate from the description of the base spell. That description of the augmented spell also comes with a minimum casting value of the augmented spell that I feel must be matched to dispel.

At the end of it, the conflict seems to lie not in the definition of the word minimum, but in the application of it. Yes, there is an absolute minimum to cast any application of Transformation of Kadon on the board. The boosted version isn't just any application, though. It's a specific application of the augmented spell with a specific, separate description of its final effect that comes at a higher casting value.

I can certainly see your point of view and I'm not saying it isn't a logical, valid argument. I just disagree for the reasons above, it's how I would make the call. At this point it just seems like something to clear with your opponent before the start of the game if you know you're going to be using RiP spells pretty often.

Edited for clarity on one of the lines.

If it helps when I was in my local games workshop (glasgow) I asked to see the Fantasy TO and asked him and he looked at me like I was an idiot and hit me with "It is the boosted versions cast value you use as its minimum cast value was 20+" The other employees agreed when I also asked them. -You need to be certain about these.
I explained the sitation in detail and he says that although it is not clear the ruling is that you used the boosted spells minimum value as you designated that spell before casting.

The text tells you to dispel on the *spells* minimum casting value in its description.

There is ONE spell.

ONE description

ONE minimum casting value in that description.

To parse that otherwise you have to insert multiple descriptions, not one, pretend the spell is actually 2 spells, allowing you to seperate out the description, AND entirely ignore the word "minimum" in the phrase entire.

This is all highly unlikely and ignores most of the rules for English sentences.

Kirbinator - the word minimum is key. Here's why:

I think the argument that a "spell's" description has to mean everything listed under that spell. But let's assume the english language doesn't mean what I think it means.
Under your explanation there are two descriptions. Ok, the "description" for that "spell" says it has a casting value of 20+. Can we all agree on this?

Therefore the rule would merely need to say "meet the casting value in the spell's description." If it said that, then I could see the merit in your argument.

However, the rule does not say that. It says the minimum casting value. Minimum implies more than 1, otherwise the word is once again superfluous. Therefore, description must encompass the whole part of the spell, as the normal use of those words would imply. Once description encompasses the whole part of the spell, we look at said description, we find the minimum casting value and that is the value used to dispel.

And syantic, sadly GW stores are known more to get the rules wrong than right.

Seems like, nos has the RAW (again), besides i'm more than willing to switch sides when it means im not on the troll's side.

Hoverboy, stop you're embarrassing yourself.

I earned that

Can i also convince people I'm male? Just because i mentioned husband doesnt stop that being true you know

Please keep the discussion civil, everyone. WHFB YMDC has a reputation to uphold!

Manchu - we were just joshing each other

And yes nos, I'm sorry, SOMEone misinformed me as to your gender. They have been corrected (as have I)

No worries, it even confused Gwar, who called me a lady....hehe

Yea Manchu we're just messin

Ooh, ooh. I may be able to offer something in a different light (though I do admit, I haven't read all of these posts...most of them, but not all):

Minimum casting value: the lowest number you need to cast the spell.
Transformation of Kadon requires a 16 or higher (16+), so 16 is the minimum. But if you opt for the boosted version, you need a 20 or higher (20+). The minimum casting value increases; otherwise, as stated earlier, you could fail to cast a boosted version but still cast the original.
Now, the matter is whether or not this is the minimum value "in the spell's description". It seems to me that the whole little passage is the spell's description, which means that spells like the Transformation of Kadon have multiple minimum casting values.

A few extra points: p.36 says "so a Wizard does not need to beat the original casting role", not the original value required, but the role that was made to cast. Support, perhaps, for Syanticraven?

And on this "no need to make note of each spell's casting roll", notice that it says, again "casting roll", not the value needed. So maybe we need to make note of which version of a spell is being casted, but not the specific total the wizard rolled? Or maybe GW thought that the Mountain Chimera or the large template-Purple Sun or whatever would be enough to remind us. Or maybe GW messed up.

Any thoughts on this?

Warp - you still haven't answered my point. If you were indeed right and the single spell had multiple descriptions, then why would they have to say minimum. Each "description" has only one "casting value." Therefore, you could say, beat the casting value in the description and not need to say minimum at all.

Minimum only makes sense if there are multiple values in the single spell's description. Oh look, there are. So it makes sense.

Meanwhile, you are still having to twist the English language just to get to that result. The spell has one description. In that description there can only be one minimum value. That value is what you have to beat.

Buh-wah? No, no, no. You mistake me. I did attempt to answer your question. And there is no twisting of words to any higher degree than is inevitable here.

Minimum: the lowest number you need to successfully cast the spell.
So, when it says "16+", it means "minimum of 16". Yes? Well, what about "20+"? It means you need 20 or more. Which means 19 or less doesn't work. Which means 20 is the minimum.

"Minimum" is, I suppose, conditional. The minimum-the "lowest value required"-changes.

Unless you suggest that they do not mean "minimum value needed", but instead, "lowest value listed", which is not what "minimum" means.

Minimum does not mean what you think it means.

But seriously, if minimum meant what you say it does here, "minimum spell value" and "spell value" mean the exact same.

Except there is ONE description and there is ONE minimum casting value in that description.

THAT is what you are twisting - you are trying to obtain either multiple descriptions from one spell (invalid) or you are pretending each value is a different spell (invalid)

Minimum:

1- the least quantity assignable, admissible, or possible.

2- the least of a set of numbers

So the first supports me, the second, you.
Killjoy, I suppose you are correct there. But you see what I'm saying, no? If I were to attempt to cast the boosted version, I could say "I need a 20 or more", which means I could say "I need a minimum of 20". So that could be the minimum casting value. The term is never defined outright, which is why this thread exists.

Nosferatu, it seems you are implying that the spell's "description" is it's name and the number that follows. Is this true? I would hazard that the name, number, and the text that follows (that describes the spell) is the description.

I do not think the answer is so clear as anyone thinks. I don't actually believe one way or the other; I simply saw many arguments that were all worded similarly, so I figured I'd try my hand at presenting the same thing differently.

Warpsolution wrote:Nosferatu, it seems you are implying that the spell's "description" is it's name and the number that follows. Is this true?.

No what he means is that the number that follows is the spell's minimum casting value, as it is the lowest value given in it's entire decription.

Ah, yes, of course. I was attempting to understand the statement using (definition of "minimum" 1) instead of (definition of "minimum" 2).

So a thank you to Hoverboy, and a "do you see where I'm going now?" to Nosferatu.

I don't think your point changes what nos and I have been saying.


How many spells is Transformation of Kadon?
The answer to this has to be 1. You roll a 6, you get this one spell. It has different versions, but it is one spell.

How many descriptions does Transformation of Kadon have?
The spell has one description. That is all the text the follows it on the Lore page.

How many minimums does that description have?
Again, one. That is 16.

When the rules say use the minimum in the description, they mean 16.

Your third point is where the problem is. How many "minimum casting values" does it have? That depends. If you mean "the lowest casting value", then you are correct. If you mean "the minimum number required to successfully cast the spell", it would be two.

So the rules could mean 16, or they could mean 16 or 20. Until someone provides evidence that one definition is more clear than another, it's up for grabs. I would tend to agree with you for easy playing, but, from what I've read, the text seems to imply otherwise slightly more than they imply this.

To be honest I was trying to get some new insights into the problem by posting it here. So far both points still seem valid to me.
"Minimum casting value" can refer to the actual minimum of the spell or it can refer to the minimum number needed to roll to cast, which changes when you cast a boosted spell.
BTW "minimum" doesn't imply 2 casting values, the 7th Ed had the same phrase. Its most likely an oversight by the writers not realizing that "minimum casting value" and "casting value" are no longer interchangeable because of the implications created by the phrases.

Actually Leith, you are wrong and that's a great point.

In 7th, the rule read:
"Note that the player only needs to beat the casting value of the spell in question - he does not have to beat the original casting score."

In 8th, the rule reads:
"a Wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll . . ., but rather the minimum casting value listed in the spell's description"


Clearly, they added the word minimum. As I've pointed out about 15 times, that word does not have any meaning if you try to explain the rule other than I have. A casting value is the value you need to attempt to cast. A spell's description lists multiple casting values, but only one minimum casting value. That is the value you use to dispel.

Killjoy00 wrote:
Clearly, they added the word minimum. As I've pointed out about 15 times, that word does not have any meaning if you try to explain the rule other than I have. A casting value is the value you need to attempt to cast. A spell's description lists multiple casting values, but only one minimum casting value. That is the value you use to dispel.

"If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+" This is part of the description why are people ignoring this, it is in the spells description and is referring to the minimum casting value being changed as soon as the controlling player says "I am casting the Boosted..."

If you ignore that sentence then yes you are correct but that sentence is key to this. It clearly states once you have opted for the boosted spell that minimum casting for the spell is increased to 20+. The description is the entire pharagaph and the rulings within it.

You do not have to split it into 2 spells with 2 different descriptions. You just have to read the rules, you are dispelling 'the' spell that is in play. And the spell in play opted for the casting value in the description to be increased to 20+ it does not reset in the next turn -the rule remains in play while the spell does, otherwise it would note in the rule that it resets . As the minimum casting value for the Transmutation of Kadon is 20+ due to the player opting for that rule to come into play.
It does not say. I find it extremely hard to take from this that the minimum to cast 'the' spell is 16+ as the rule states that this has been increased to 20+.

It says increase for aa reason.

Also, Sol be calm it is a discussion not a battle.

If I ever came across this problem myself I would hope to run it this way to be fair to my opponent (I find it lacking in spirit if I need a 16+ to dispell a spell which had a minimum casting value of 20+) I also hold the staff in the GW accountable as a unofficial FAQ but it can be argued their ruling is moot. If tey disagree then I will offer them a roll off to decide or get the TO

The minimum is the lowest number out of a set of number need to obtain a certain function. In our case here the function being turning into a mountain chimera. To obtain this function need a need to reach a minimum casting value of 20. I decide to use 6d6 to attempt to reach this minimum casting value, and succeed with a roll of 28. 28 is now the total casting value of my function. On your next turn you decide to try to turn me back to normal. Lucky for you the original casting value has faded, and need only reach my minimum casting value for my mountain chimera which is the lesser the numbers I used to reach my function.

Yes this is a mathematical definition of minimum, but is the correct use of the definition. I have not known our played against anyone that reads this rule any other way. It is not the lesser value it is the minimum value that the spell required to be cast that you have to dispel for the RIP spells. The the 20+ spell required a minimum casting value of 20 so you have to dispel it on a 20 or double 6' s.

Oh and sorry didn't mean to be brash it just seems like arguing for arguments sake. The mathematical definition is minimum is what it is, and you can't make the minimum of a function a number that wasn't a part of it originally. A minimum of 20 can't also have a minimum of 16.

There is only one number needed to turn into a mountain chimera. That number is 20.

Do you agree with this?

If so, they could have said "the casting value" just like they did in 7th edition, and you would need a 20 to dispel it.

So why did they put the word minimum there, unless to distinguish between the TWO casting values in the SPELL'S description.

1) also supports our side - the least quantity possible is 16+

The entirety of the spell text is the description. There is one single description which contains the minimum value.

You still have failed to eliminate the use of the word "minimum", which is crucial here. There is no need for "minimum" in your interpretation.

Killjoy00 wrote:There is only one number needed to turn into a mountain chimera. That number is 20.

Do you agree with this?

If so, they could have said "the casting value" just like they did in 7th edition, and you would need a 20 to dispel it.

So why did they put the word minimum there, unless to distinguish between the TWO casting values in the SPELL'S description.

So when some dude gets lucky and rolls a 36 on 6d6 you wont have to spend the rest of the game trying to roll a 36 to dispel a mountain chimera while it eats yor army. You just to roll a 20 or double 6' s.

Sol, reading fail:

In 8th, the rule reads:
"a Wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll . . ., but rather the minimum casting value listed in the spell's description"

It clearly distinguishes between the "original casting dice roll" which is what you are referring to and the "casting value" which is 20. And the minimum casting value in the spell's description, which is 16.

Killjoy00 wrote:Sol, reading fail:

In 8th, the rule reads:
"a Wizard does not need to beat the original casting dice roll . . ., but rather the minimum casting value listed in the spell's description"

It clearly distinguishes between the "original casting dice roll" which is what you are referring to and the "casting value" which is 20. And the minimum casting value in the spell's description, which is 16.

My reading is fine I am using that as an example to show you the corret use of the term minimum in relation to it's use in removing remains in at spells. Honestly though idc anymore it is what it is, and after playing 8 th since release and winning some good stuff against some really good players I know in competition this is the way it plays and the way it is written in the rules.

So, in summation "im right because i am" is your position?

Nope, that isnt how the rules read - you have removed the need for the word minimum, tried to remove the concept of *one* description as having any meaning, etc.

You're not the only one to play 8th since release. Not only an attempt at appeal to authority, but a flawed fallacy at that...

Yeesh. So, I think Killjoy brings the second valid bit of evidence against my suggestion. The change between 7th's "casting value" and 8th's "minimum casting value" greatly suggests that the word was included for a reason.

Couple that with the first valid argument against me ("if spells have multiple minimum casting values, then the terms 'casting value' and 'minimum casting value' are interchangeable"), and we see something a little more concrete.

Unfortunately, a strong implication is still only an implication. So it's still up in the air.

And Nosferatu, I'm not sure if your harshness is out of a desire to make people feel stupid (and thus get them to accept your views faster) or just a natural thing, but c'mon. "Least possible" could mean "least [successful cast] possible" just as easily as "least possible [number present]". Yes, there is no need for the word "minimum" in this view, as stated earlier, but that does not mean that the word's presence must mean one thing or another, or that it must be vital. GW writers are not philosophers, and the brb isn't one big proof.

I honestly don't understand why it's so hard to present an argument tentatively, and admit that there is, in fact, a different way to look at things.
If everything were as obvious as some of us are making them out to be, why does this thread-why do arguments in general-exist at all? This isn't a case between Right vs. Dumb.

nosferatu1001 wrote:So, in summation "im right because i am" is your position?

Nope, that isnt how the rules read - you have removed the need for the word minimum, tried to remove the concept of *one* description as having any meaning, etc.

You're not the only one to play 8th since release. Not only an attempt at appeal to authority, but a flawed fallacy at that...

Actually I have not removed the word minimum. I have explained why it is need in the letter of the rules. Previously in 7th Ed you only had one casting value so they could say you only had to reach the casting value. Now we have up to 3 different casting values so no you have to distinguish between them. By saying you have to reach the minimum they simply mean you have to reach the minimum for what ever particular spell is rip in the case of khadon it can be 2 different thing. Also if the casting value is 20 the minimum of 20 can never be 16 it can only be defined as less then 20. So by your logic the rule have to read that it is dispelled with the lesser not the minimum.

The only appeal to authority that would have any weight here is one to nos himself - that's how I got Hoverboy to change his mind.

Sol, hold on a second.

Nosferatu and crew are suggesting that "minimum" means "the smallest", which is a valid point. If this is the case, the "minimum casting value", meaning the "smallest casting value" is 16.

Also, I do not understand your first point at all. How is it that they need to use the word "minimum" in 8th if the "minimum" is whichever you choose?

Because we have 2 different values 16 and 20. If they wanted it to be dispelled on 16 they would have said the lesser not minimum. The minimum is simply ment to suggest you dispel on the 20 not the total rolled in casting. At the end of the day is just a matter of agreeing to disagree. But I do enjoy the debate. I also don't feel like our point is coming across very well, which is my fault for my poor typing skills.

Also, not trying to get off topic, but what do you think the chances are of some more erratas in the near future?

Considering they just released updated FAQs today for almost all of the army books and BRB, not anytime soon.

Yeah not for a while. I have the feeling it wont ever be answered either.

My argument is that there is a second ruling within the spells description that notes "If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+" -As in if he chooses to cast the higher power spell. I failed to add the beginning because I am currently out of my home. The spell is counted as having 1 value and only 1 value. But tat value is dependant on which version of the spell te player designated to cast. It is all in the one description.

Anyway my argument that this alone notes that the minimum to cast the spell has to be increased to 20+ (It has to be the minimum as it cannot be cast on anything other then 20+ - 20+ is the absolute minimum needed to cast the spell, 16+ does not exist after designating the higher spell, it has been replaced -The rules say it is Increased)

syanticraven wrote:I have the feeling it wont ever be answered either.

Have faith my friend, the halls of 40k YMDC used to be frought with Deff Rolla fussing every few weeks for a good long time until GW felt it was enough of a player issue to say "Yes, we want to sell Deff Rolla upgrades". Actually, I don't think that's a fair example since GW has no monetary gain by a "gw houserule" (see also FAQ) ruling on this one.

Now to post my question for Transformation of Kadon: Whether or not you should put down a new "transformed" model for your wizard. I vote yes, but there again I don't like the idea of 20mm square red dragons.

Kirbinator wrote:

syanticraven wrote:I have the feeling it wont ever be answered either.

Have faith my friend, the halls of 40k YMDC used to be frought with Deff Rolla fussing every few weeks for a good long time until GW felt it was enough of a player issue to say "Yes, we want to sell Deff Rolla upgrades". Actually, I don't think that's a fair example since GW has no monetary gain by a "gw houserule" (see also FAQ) ruling on this one.

Now to post my question for Transformation of Kadon: Whether or not you should put down a new "transformed" model for your wizard. I vote yes, but there again I don't like the idea of 20mm square red dragons.

I dont have my rulebook with me atm but does it say exactly? I remember it saying if the wizard is in a unit then there must be space for the new model to fit into that unit. Or along those lines.

As for the other ruling. I would take the GW stores tournament runners word for now (They are the highest possible authourity I can contact at the moment other then people on this forum and non GW TOs) Sure there word is not law because it is not in the FAQ yet but I will house rule it in with there jurisitiction. I did make sure to ask a few of them and ask it in a non biasis way thought. There is no point in getting them to agree with you when you are both wrong. That would be cheating and I am against all forms of it, after all this is a game for fun.

Thing is the staff in my area are split on the matter. The TO at the tournament where it came up agreed that "minimum" meant the lower value, but my opponent and another staff member we asked said it was changed to 20.

Besides, having been told i was wrong about 7th Ed, leads me to believe I was right all along. There is no point in adding minimum in that descriptor as it appears almost nowhere else (certainly nowhere that i can find), unless it is meant to specifically refer to something. If it were meant to be interpreted as using the new casting value the word "minimum" would have been omitted because its ambiguous.
On the other hand, i will admit they may have just forgotten to edit it out.

It would of been much better if they threw in an example, they done it with so many other things, it would of certainly solved this problem for us.

Lol, like the example that says a hero casts a bound spell? That hasn't made the other thread go any easier.

No but it would have solved this problem for us if they used the boosted version within the example. They just used a horrible example for the bound spell.

Nos and Killjoy have this right. If the rule did not state 'in the spell description' then you could argue that you only have to roll the minimum casting value for that version. The fact that it says to look at the spell description and not concern yourself with the actual spell means that you only have to roll a 16 to dispel it.

Also, to the people claiming that there's 2 descriptions then that would imply that each version is a separate spell and thus castable. So, with that interpretation you could cast fireball 3 times as there are 3 versions of the spell. Clearly you cannot do that thus you have to assume that a spell is actually a spell and not a collection of spells. Man, this side of the argument is confusing. How do you guys function with stuff like this clouding up your brain?

I don't think anyone said there was 2 descriptions just examples that would need 2 descriptions to work they way said other person means.

I think that it logically means the 20+ lvl as that is the one you attempted to cast.

Except that isnt what the rules say.

Interesting fluff basis (although countered by other, logical fluff arguments also presented) except the rules ask for the MINIMUM value in THE spells description.

There is a single description
There is only ONE value that is the minimum value in that description.

Within the description it also say that

"The Wizard can choose to cast a more powerful version of the spell ... If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+"

The wizard has chosen to cast the more powerful version and the cast number beside the spell has to be changed to 20+ as the spells rule requirement, so when looking at the description of the spell minimum cast value it is now 20+. After opting for the stronger spell the 16+ no longer exists for the spell in play. (the only reason you still see it in the description is because the book cannot re write itself.)

Except that isnt what the rule asks for.

There is ONE minimum value in the ONE description of the ONE spell you have just cast. You are still either atguing there are two descriptions, or that the word "minimum" has no meaning. Neither are correct, both involve rewriting or parsing the sentence in a way other than English would do.

Don't put words in my mouth. This rule is within the 1 description and it clearly states the casting value has to be changed to 20+.

'the minimum casting value' is still 20+ as it is the smallest possible number the spell could of been cast on. There is no way after opting for the stronger version that it could be cast on a 16+ as 16+ doesnt exist, it has been changed to 20+ for the duration of the spell.

Except you are utterly changing the wording.

The minimum casting value IN *the* description is 16+

You cannto show otherwise.

I'm pretty sure I am not.

"The Wizard can choose to cast a more powerful version of the spell ... If he does so the casting value is increased to 20+"

16+ becomes 20+ as it is increased to 20+.

'The' refers to the spell in play you are trying to dispel. Which according to the above rule within its description has a minimum casting value of 20+ due to the opting for the stronger version. It has to count as a minimal casting value because after the opt there is no possible way for it to be cast without scoring 20+

I'm surprised this is still going. Both sides have valid viewpoints, both sides have local areas that play with their interpretation of the rule. It's been made pretty clear how participating individuals would make the call. Are we sure this can't just sleep with the fishes at this point?

Kirbinator wrote:I'm surprised this is still going. Both sides have valid viewpoints, both sides have local areas that play with their interpretation of the rule. It's been made pretty clear how participating individuals would make the call. Are we sure this can't just sleep with the fishes at this point?

I have the feeling we both suffer from the "No I'm right" complex. But sure I will let it die. I suppose we both repeated our points to each other enough times lol.

Syantic - so in a single description of a spell (which we can all agree on, right?) you are saying the minimum value in the description of the spell (not the power level of the spell you cast, but the description in toto) is not *actually* the minimum value of the entire description, but in fact the highest (potentially) value in the entire description?

And that doesnt seem odd to you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Essentiallyou are asked to find the minimum value in the following:

description = {text, 16+, text, 20+}

You are directed to only look at minimum values, not taking any consideration for the text of the description, just the values.

SO you find the minimum value. Which is 16+

Your method finds the maximum value.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Essentiall you are asked to find the minimum value in the following:

description = {text, 16+, text, 20+}

You are directed to only look at minimum values, not taking any consideration for the text of the description, just the values.

SO you find the minimum value. Which is 16+

Your method finds the maximum value.

That's out of context though. Those two blocks of 'text' in the description tell you want the numbers stand for, in this case that second block of text basically tells you to now ignore the 16+ because you are solely dealing with the 20+ because you are boosting the spell.

Except that the rule you are trying to follow doesnt care about the "context" of the text, it only cares about values within the block of text.

You are told to look in the description and find the minimum casting value in that description.

There is ONE description with multiple values in it. Only ONE of these values can be accurately descrbed as "the minimum value", and it never changes. It is entirely independent of what power level you cast the spell at.

Round and round we go. I mentioned all this post 5, first page and the argument has remained the same.

I think this "discussion" has run its course unless someone has new information or a new angle. Each side repeating itself for 2.5 pages isn't very constructive.

Don't give up yet guys, if we make enough noise GW might take notice and include this in the next FAQ. Not to mention that lizardmen are one of the armies that didn't get a new FAQ with the last wave of updates so it shouldn't be far off.
In fact go spread it to other forums just in case

Reading this thread is like watching Nascar in word form....

My 2 cents... In the single spell 'Transformation' there are 2 versions of the spell, the standard and the boosted version. For boosted spells you must make note that the boosted version of the spell was cast.

So we declare that we are using the 20+ version. How many casting values does transformation of kadon have... 1, a 16. How many casting values does 'boosted' transformation have... 1, a 20. The minimum of each set of numbers is 16 or 20, depending on the version. VERSION MUST BE SPECIFIED!

You declare you will be dispelling my RIP spell. You must declare WHICH VERSION you will be dispelling, standard or boosted. The same spell can have multiple instances which are different.

Example: I have 2 wizards cast miasma on the same unit. First casts boosted version, and your unit takes -1 to a bunch of stats. Now, for a particular combat -1 to WS isnt enough, so I cast the standard version of miasma to try and get a lower value, and get a -3 to ws.

Your turn, you declare you will be dispelling miasma. First, however, you must declare which of the 2 versions of the spell you will dispell, as each functions differently and has their own rules.

IMHO Nos and Killjoy have glossed over the fact that there indeed are 2 versions of numerous spells, not 1 spell with 1 description and 2 casting values; the version is very important and must be specified.

From a RAW standpoitnt I would have to agree with NoS and Killjoy on the matter. It only ever tells you to use the minimum value in the spells description. It doesn't say or even hint at using the minimum value for the boosted spell. It is possible that it was meant to be this way to balance out how powerful magic has become.

From a logical standpoint dispelling at the boosted value makes more sense. However, RAW doesn't always follow logic. If you are supposed to dispel it at the boosted version it should have been worded differently.

In a game I would play it either way depending on how my opponent would want to do it. I'm not really concerned with which was is the "correct" way. It'll either get FAQ'd (I hope it does. I'm interested to see how GW meant it to work) or it'll remain one of those grey areas.

syanticraven wrote:
If a wizard picks to cast the second (boosted) version of the spell you cannot pick to dispel the first version as it has not actually been cast.

That tells you right there. it uses the boosted spells minimum value because that was the spell cast plain and simple becasue the lesser version was not cast. Syanticraven has it right. you cant argue symantics on this one.

The symantics youa re arguing is the fact you dont understand context. when it says minimum it is reffering to what is needed to cast the spell at tis base. Meaning you disrgard the roll that was used to initialy cast the spell, So say i cast transform and decided to boost the effect and roll a 40, then you have to match my 40 on the first time you try to dispell it and on any subsequent turn after that it goes back to being a 20 to dispell for the remainder of the battle. The fact that in the spell it says if you boost it the spells casting total then becomes 20+. The spell itself changes.

Edited by Manchu. Stay polite and on-topic.

Infreak: "It only ever tells you to use the minimum value in the spells description. It doesn't say or even hint at using the minimum value for the boosted spell"

It does say you must specify which version of the spell, boosted or standard, you are using, and make note of it. Thus, I declare the boosted spell version, it remains the boosted spell version. There are 2 versions of the spell in the description, and the spells are different entities from each other. To read the description of the standard spell (including casting cost) when dispelling the boosted versions is to be reading the wrong spell.

I try to say goodbye and I choke...


Look - if it worked the way you are trying to say, there is NO reason for the word minimum to be there.

Try it.

Take out the word minimum.

Now it works exactly the way you say.

In fact, that's how it worked in 7th. There was no word minimum there.

Now there is. And that word only has meaning if you use the 16 rather than the 20.

Mmm, this is murky!

Glad to have this brought to my attention, though, as I'd never considered it... also agree that both sides have made their points abundantly clear by now

Edit: Nice song reference

DevianID - So your argument is there are now two spells, the boosted and the normal version?

Odd, i can only see one spell name there. Nope, cant see two.

YOU have to make note of which version you are trying to cast, as it stops you failing the higher version and pretending you went for the lower one.

However nothing in the actual rules for dispelling RIP makes any mention ever at any point in time whatsoever about what version of the spell you cast. All it cares about is finding the minimum value in the description.

To the poster talking about context: reading is tech. Try it.

Killjoy00 wrote:I try to say goodbye and I choke...


Look - if it worked the way you are trying to say, there is NO reason for the word minimum to be there.

Try it.

Take out the word minimum.

Now it works exactly the way you say.

In fact, that's how it worked in 7th. There was no word minimum there.

Now there is. And that word only has meaning if you use the 16 rather than the 20.

I still dont think that youur correct But after reading throughh the rule book, yes GW did fail to make it clear, the word i thought thatw as there is indeed not. they failed to cite an example which they shouuld have done as they did with every other entry of relevence in that section. i appologize for being a rude ass.

TitanKiller, congrats on being a straight-up, honest b.a.

I wonder what would happen if both sides admitted that the other side did, in fact, have a point.

1- Dispel at the lowest number required to cast the spell. This is legit, because the mathematical phrase 16+ and 20+ implies that the number stated is a minimum.

2- Dispel it at the lowest possible value. This is legit, because the above argument could function with or without the word "minimum", which has been included, compared to 7th edition, and thus seems to suggest that the word has a purpose.

Honestly, folks, there's no way to convince the other side of your argument, or else you'd have done it already. I would wager that any further debate is either a stubborn or argumentative gesture. Why can't people state things just a bit tentatively? Descartes already proved that certainty is impossible; can we at least admit that there is the smallest possibility that we're mistaken?

I say we set it aside.

I am the other side and I have already admitted nos has a very good point.

Well there is only one way, its the fact that Gw failed to cite an example for a rule that needs one. They say that the power for the spell fades, but they don't clarify what is needed to maintain a boosted spells power. As in if you cast Transform boosted turned into a fire dragon and then the spells power dwindles some shouldn't you then turn to a lesser form, since the power that was needed to make the trasnformation in the first place isn't there anymore. The inital part of the rule i had quoted from another acctualy is not in the the actual ruling once i was able top read it for myself. i checked the Faq's as well and no mention of this case was made there either. So who the hell knows what Gw acctualy intended it to be in the first place.

nosferatu1001 wrote:DevianID - So your argument is there are now two spells, the boosted and the normal version?
Odd, i can only see one spell name there. Nope, cant see two.
YOU have to make note of which version you are trying to cast, as it stops you failing the higher version and pretending you went for the lower one.
However nothing in the actual rules for dispelling RIP makes any mention ever at any point in time whatsoever about what version of the spell you cast. All it cares about is finding the minimum value in the description.
To the poster talking about context: reading is tech. Try it.

So nos, my point is that there are 2 versions of the spell transformation. By the words you wrote, you acknowledge there are 2 versions of the same spell that you must make note of which was cast. Yet then you say that there is only 1 spell name and dismiss the 2 versions?

Basicly, you go to dispell a RIP spell. You comment that dispelling RIP makes no mention of boosted/regular--fair enough. HOWEVER, what spell are you dispelling? You must specify which spell is being dispelled, and the boosted version is different, and noted to be different (by our mutual consent) than the non-boosted version.

What is the minimum casting value for boosted transformation? What spell are you dispelling--boosted transformation.

DevianID wrote:What is the minimum casting value for boosted transformation? What spell are you dispelling--boosted transformation.

Unless I am totally missing something, the point is that there is not actually a spell named "boosted transformation" or whatever. Even if there are two versions, they share one description in the book. That description is what is referenced by the rules in question.

Regardless, glad to know this one as I am starting a new list for Fantasy discussions prior to the game.

Thanks folks!

You do have it right, the wording of the rules is that the casting wizard has the option to infuse the spell with more power to get a greater effect, however under the remains in play poartion of the description when it talks about the spell losing power and needing to only match the minimum spell dificulty to dispel it dosn't dictate which is the correct number, which we come to the impass of Does the spell require the original power it took to cast it or does it only require and effective "upkeep" of power meaning that it only has X amoutn of power sustaining it that needs to be dispelled. They cited the example of the bright wizard fire force cage and the boosting it to the 14+ to cast from 11+, but did not site what would happen with say Purple sun when cast at the 25+ spell level wether you have to beat 25 or 15 only that you DON'T need to beat the original casting total of the dice rolled only the minimum requirement for the spell. In all basics its a GW issue to be dealt with and no one who is not a writer or developer of the 8th edition rule set can ever awenser as to what the intention of the rule set is.

Kirsanth - that was exactly my point.

You have ONE spell named "transformation of Khadron"

THat spell has a *single* description of how the spell works, either as a 16+ or a 20+ , but it is still ONE description.

So when you are told to find the minimum value in the description of the spell, you must do the following:

1) Find the spell you want to dispel. Name of "Transformation of Khadron" - check.
2) Find the minimum value within that description. There are 2 values in the spell (note singular, not plural) description - 16+ and 20+. Only one of these is the minimum value
3) Once you have found the minimum value you can then attempt to dispel.

Nowhere ini the directives for Transformation are you allowed to a) determine if there is a higher level of spell in play - only the OWNING player makes a note, not the opposite number! or b) divide the description up into 2 descriptions.

The minimum value of description(Transformation of Khadron) = {text, 16+, text, 20+} is always, 100% without exception 16+.

Sorry guys but in the BRB it says you need to beat the casting value of the spell to kill it.

If the spell is cast at a 18 you will need a 19 to stop it. I know I didn't believe it myself but it's there.

Scooter - reading is tech. This is about dispelling RIP.

You also only need to equal to dispel.

scooter wrote:Sorry guys but in the BRB it says you need to beat the casting value of the spell to kill it.

If the spell is cast at a 18 you will need a 19 to stop it. I know I didn't believe it myself but it's there.

Pg 35, In bold under the title 'Dispel Value'
"For a dispel to suceed, the total of the dice rolled, added to the Wizard's level, must equal or beat the spell's casting result."

Just to clarify..

Most have missed that thanks

It also wasnt what the thread was about - which is dispelling remains in play spells in following turns.

nosferatu1001 wrote:It also wasnt what the thread was about - which is dispelling remains in play spells in following turns.

I think we got trolled to be honest.

syanticraven wrote:I think we got trolled to be honest.

Like so.

Sorry to thread necromance but the new FAQ solved this:

new FAQ wrote:Q: If I am dispelling a boosted Remains in Play spell, what value
do I need to beat to dispel it? (p36)
A: You will need to beat the basic casting value of the spell
(not the boosted casting value).

Just throwing it here so none of the people involved get it wrong, like ever

Thank goodness for that.