Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Is it generally believed that this is an error in editing, or do the rules stand as written?

Thanks.

My view is that it's an editing error, as "consumed" mentioned in the rules implies that it's used up.

As the previous person said, most people read "consumes" as what we all understand the word consume to mean. Of course, a friend of mine who plays Skaven refuses to interpret it that way and plays warpstones strictly as RaW and they are not one use only items.

To be fair, his argument is very logical: there are other items in the book that clearly write "One Use Only" or something similar to that effect even when their flavor text describes the item as being used. Since warpstone's flavor text says consumes, but rules do not specify One Use Only, he does not believe it to be as such and refuses to play otherwise.

Though he has not brought a Storm Banner to a game, he says he would also refuse to play it as a One Use Item because it is not written as such in the English book, but is in the others.

One day GW might put this in the FAQ/Errata, but don't hold your breath.

Personally, I look at the previous edition Skaven book and... oh, look at that, both the Stormbanner and Warpstone tokens are One Use Only.

One would think that by now, everyone knew that GW doesn't proofread their stuff before publication and would be ready to 'self-correct' obvious errors like this one. Yeeesh.

Last edition of the lizardmen army book, Scar Veterans had Toughness 4...Now they have toughness 5. How do you know that that isn't an 'obvious' error?

Things change between editions of an army book.

Kirbinator wrote:
Though he has not brought a Storm Banner to a game, he says he would also refuse to play it as a One Use Item because it is not written as such in the English book, but is in the

I'm pretty sure the storm banner isn't written as one use only in any of the books.

It is One Use Only in at least 4 other languages that I've seen so far...

skyth wrote:Last edition of the lizardmen army book, Scar Veterans had Toughness 4...Now they have toughness 5. How do you know that that isn't an 'obvious' error?

Things change between editions of an army book.

Did the Scar Veterans get more expensive? If so, then it's likely not a mistake. Did they get cheaper? Then it probably is a mistake.

And seriously, the fluff says the warpstone tolken is consumed. It literally gets frikin' eaten by the spellcaster. How much more obvious does it have to be?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:It is One Use Only in at least 4 other languages that I've seen so far...

Plus in the last edition as well.

Wow, that is odd, I hadn't even noticed the new codex didn't mention that the tokens were one use only. I suppose technically by RaW they could be reused even if logic and sensability would dictate otherwise. But honestly, what kind of player would make this argument? It's some pretty poor sportsmanship IMO.

Vulcan wrote:

skyth wrote:Last edition of the lizardmen army book, Scar Veterans had Toughness 4...Now they have toughness 5. How do you know that that isn't an 'obvious' error?

Things change between editions of an army book.

Did the Scar Veterans get more expensive? If so, then it's likely not a mistake. Did they get cheaper? Then it probably is a mistake.

And seriously, the fluff says the warpstone tolken is consumed. It literally gets frikin' eaten by the spellcaster. How much more obvious does it have to be?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:It is One Use Only in at least 4 other languages that I've seen so far...

Plus in the last edition as well.

maybe he only nibbles it?

Vulcan wrote:

skyth wrote:Last edition of the lizardmen army book, Scar Veterans had Toughness 4...Now they have toughness 5. How do you know that that isn't an 'obvious' error?

Things change between editions of an army book.

Did the Scar Veterans get more expensive? If so, then it's likely not a mistake. Did they get cheaper? Then it probably is a mistake.

So things getting better between editions means that it was a mistake? That's laughable and why you can't use what something did in the last edition as an arguement about what they do in the current edition, as things change and get weaker/more powerful between editions.

They get eaten. Hard to be more 'One Use Only' than that. And if they weren't 'One Use Only', then there would be no point in taking multiples, would there?

If there are no rules about them pooping it out after eating it , its safe to say its 1 use only >

Manfred von Drakken wrote:They get eaten. Hard to be more 'One Use Only' than that. And if they weren't 'One Use Only', then there would be no point in taking multiples, would there?

Again, I agree with the common statement of "it says it's consumed, thus it's gone," but he does bring up a somewhat valid statement that many other items in the Skaven book itself (not to mention across other books as well) dictate One Use Only despite its flavor text saying something to that same effect. Technically, there is not a rule that the token is gone, only that the caster is subject to a wound if he rolls a 1 with that die.

Regarding taking multiples, the more you use in a turn, the higher your risk of taking a wound. You'd take multiples to have more PD each round, but also comes at the higher risk.

Kirbinator wrote:

Manfred von Drakken wrote:They get eaten. Hard to be more 'One Use Only' than that. And if they weren't 'One Use Only', then there would be no point in taking multiples, would there?

Again, I agree with the common statement of "it says it's consumed, thus it's gone," but he does bring up a somewhat valid statement that many other items in the Skaven book itself (not to mention across other books as well) dictate One Use Only despite its flavor text saying something to that same effect. Technically, there is not a rule that the token is gone, only that the caster is subject to a wound if he rolls a 1 with that die.

Regarding taking multiples, the more you use in a turn, the higher your risk of taking a wound. You'd take multiples to have more PD each round, but also comes at the higher risk.

And again, I come back to: "Play he game, not the rules."

Actually it only says "some warpstone" is consumed not "warpstone tokens" are consumed. I wouldn't ever argue that flavor text equals rules.

I would have to say that both sides have pretty reasonable arguments and we will probably need to wait for the FAQ for a definitive answer.

I think they are actually meant to be reusable. If you compare their cost to power stones, theres almost no reason to buy warpstone tokens. It doesn't say one use only and the upgrade is pluralized, as in you buy "Warpstone Tokens" for 15 points. The fact that they allow you to buy multiples allows you to use the upgrade multiple times per turn. The fact that they were one use only before means nothing now, this is a new book. Its powerful, but also very risky just like everything else in the Skaven book.

JourneyPsycheOut wrote:It doesn't say one use only

It does in four other language's versions of the book.

The fact that they were one use only before means nothing now, this is a new book.

So can O&G players now shoot into their own Fanatics again?

Its powerful, but also very risky just like everything else in the Skaven book.

If this is the case, and I'm not saying it is, then how do you explain the stupid-high number of tokens Thanquol owns? Are you saying he can use something like six warpstone tokens each magic phase, assuming so-so rolling for his number of tokens? He'd get more extra dice each turn than many Elf / Lizardmen wizards would get per game.

of course

Minsc wrote:If this is the case, and I'm not saying it is, then how do you explain the stupid-high number of tokens Thanquol owns? Are you saying he can use something like six warpstone tokens each magic phase, assuming so-so rolling for his number of tokens? He'd get more extra dice each turn than many Elf / Lizardmen wizards would get per game.

He'd also get to reroll any 1s, decreasing his miscast chance and increasing his irresistible force chance. He'd be amazingly good.

Manfred von Drakken wrote:And again, I come back to: "Play he game, not the rules."

I second this.

It's not rocket science. You eat a hamburger, it is gone. You eat a piece of cake, it is gone. You eat a warpstone tolken, it is gone.

Minsc wrote:

JourneyPsycheOut wrote:It doesn't say one use only

It does in four other language's versions of the book.

Are you sure about this? I had read here that it says One Use Only on the Storm Banner in the non-English books, but did not see anyone mention it was the same for Tokens.

Kirbinator wrote:Are you sure about this?

For now, I'm going to give nosferatu1001 the benefit of the doubt.

I think, unless it says one-use only, that it can be re-used.

Minsc wrote:

Kirbinator wrote:Are you sure about this?

For now, I'm going to give nosferatu1001 the benefit of the doubt.

We were talking about the Storm Banner when Nosferatu mentioned the One Use Only being in other language's books. If he, or anyone else with access to other languages' books, would like to clarify if this also applied to Warpstone Tokens, that'd be great.

RAW - sure you could argue it doesn't say one-use so they would be amazingly broken. RAI - they're one use. I'm sure it'll come out in the FAQ correcting all of the 1-use items that should be in the book. Until the FAQ comes out, I would say use a little common sense and play it was intended. I go back to my general principle of when it comes down to a RAW vs. RAI - don't be a *ss and play it right.

Its my understanding that the tokens can be taken multiple times by the same character (I don't play Skaven, nor have ever come up against them in a game). However, would GW (and this might be a stretch) not put in "One use only" because they assumed players would misread the rules and say to someone who took multiples "Sorry the rulebook says one use only, taking multiples was a misprint."

From the sounds of it, it really should be a one use only per token.

A question though... If a model takes multiples can they use multiples per magic phase? Is that even clearly written out in the book? (Again I dont know much about skaven).

Mattbranb wrote:RAW - sure you could argue it doesn't say one-use so they would be amazingly broken. RAI - they're one use. I'm sure it'll come out in the FAQ correcting all of the 1-use items that should be in the book. Until the FAQ comes out, I would say use a little common sense and play it was intended. I go back to my general principle of when it comes down to a RAW vs. RAI - don't be a *ss and play it right.

Really? I didn't know you wrote the Skaven book. You must have if you knew what was intended though. I have heard from multiple sources that it is not a misprint and they are in fact reusable.

Note: You don't consume "warpstone tokens", just "some warpstone".

The item description states "for each token consumed, a Wizard can add 1 casting dice . . . .for any of the warpstone generated dice that rolls a 1" = you can use multiples a turn.

The argument that folks are using with the "One use only" missing from the description is that it says the tokens are consumed and in the last codex they were "one use only". Kind of like the storm banner - the non-English speaking books have them listed as one use only, but the English codex seems to have some misprints.

reading the entry in the book it clearly states that you can have multiples, and use as many as you have (or have left) any time you attempt cast a spell. they are 1 use only, as it states that a token is 'consumed' to produce one extra power die.
RAW isnt clearly stated that the token is 1 use only but the RAI (wording) states that it is.
i stongly suggest you use as 1 use only.