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.

RAI is tricky, because it relies almost solely on what you mentioned in the last sentence; opinion. Player A could interpret Rule Z differently to player B when it comes to the rule's intent.

true, opinion can be a cloudy issue, which is why it would be nice for GW to make everything clear but alas this is never going to happen.
OT, if a summoning spell provides a player with additional models, and so too does the 13th spell (if the correct roll is made), then it is not a valid target for the 3rd eye.

There are spells that specifically summon things

Technically, Invocation never uses the word summon. It uses words like "new model" and "new unit" but nowhere in the text does it say "summon." That means we cannot look for the word "summon" in the spell text to be our qualifier for what is allowed and what is not allowed by the Third Eye. Instead we should focus on the "additional" portion of the rule.

Clearly in the case of Invocation, we have additional models to the table total.

In the case of the 13th we do not have additional models to the table total, but we do have additional models to the player total in particular.

I do not believe we have definitive proof as to whether the word "additional" applies to the player, or to the table. I have personal opinions on what is intended by the rule, but we all know RAI is not the best route to take when approaching a rules query.

As many have pointed out, this situation is unlikely to come up in many tourneys, but I would discuss it with my opponent before hand.

kirsanth wrote:"the spell turns 4d6 of the targeted unit's models into Clanrats. . .remove the enemy models and replace them with Clanrats. . ."

It also goes on to say "If the casting player does not have enough models to replace the entire unit, transfigure what you can, the rest are considered destroyed. If the number rolled is not great enough to replace the whole targeted unit. . ."

As a chaos player, I do not have any clan rats. As per the spell description, if I have 0, 0 are replaced, and all of them are just destroyed.
So, as long as I don't have any clan rats with me, I'd say I am free to eye the 13th spell.

-Matt

If GW does FAQ that 13th is fine with 3rd Eye in its entirety, I wonder how many players will be taking a small unit of Clan Rats with them to every tournament, just in case.

Listen GW! You found a way to sell every WoC player a box of Clan Rats! GET ON THAT FAQ!

HawaiiMatt wrote:

kirsanth wrote:"the spell turns 4d6 of the targeted unit's models into Clanrats. . .remove the enemy models and replace them with Clanrats. . ."

It also goes on to say "If the casting player does not have enough models to replace the entire unit, transfigure what you can, the rest are considered destroyed. If the number rolled is not great enough to replace the whole targeted unit. . ."

As a chaos player, I do not have any clan rats. As per the spell description, if I have 0, 0 are replaced, and all of them are just destroyed.
So, as long as I don't have any clan rats with me, I'd say I am free to eye the 13th spell.

-Matt

this is the main reason i asked ?. i'm not interested in the clanrats. just the potential of killing 4 to 24 infantry models if lost best spells to miscast unleashing dreaded thirteenth is a good filler spell especially if the target unit is already depleted

Talking about usage for a second, since I think the interpretation is pretty well done being discussed:

The interesting thing about this spell is that for skaven it can be awesome. Turn a unit of chosen into clanrats? YES.

But in the reverse... turn a unit of plague monks or storm vermin into clanrats... with the super high casting value of the spell, I'd say this = Do Not Want.

Well, if they are YOUR clanrats, that's not too shabby. Does it clarify who gets control of the clanrats, the casting player or the owning player?

The player who casts the spell has control of the clanrats.

Ok good, that's what I was assuming. I may prefer marauders and warriors, but I wouldn't turn my nose up at a dozen ratters for the low low cost of stealing your spell and a handful of dice

They also are in CC with the unit if the target unit survives right?


could be a sneaky way of tying up some nasty skaven unit for a turn or 2.

i dont see the 13th being useful against skaven themselves mainly because of the high cost to cast and the amount of models in most of their units. Plague, scorch and death frenzy (especially on my trolls or halbread warriors) is far more nasty against them.

Nope, if you don't change the entire unit, you don't get clan rats. It's assumed their comrades kill them while they transform. You either get all the unit or no clan rats.

This reminds me of all the arguments over what spells actually "targeted" in 7th edition, in order to turn on magic resistance. Man, fewer things make me want to vomit in rage than arguing semantics across Warhammer army books

As to the 13th spell and third eye, I myself have played that I cannot steal the spell, due to the possibility of creating models. YMMV.

- Salvage

Too few spells target anything anymore.

my Runemaw is useless against PS

I think the problem here is that, as many people have pointed out, both Third Eye and the Curse are worded in a very fluffy manner.

The word "summon" in Third Eye is essentially useless. The phrase "...turns 4d6...models into Clanrats" is basically the same (due to the fact that neither of these situations are technical; they're just descriptive).

Essentially, I would move that the Curse of the Horned Rat works as follows: you kill 4d6 models, and if the unit is wiped out, you get the unit's worth of models in Clanrats. I think that reading clears up whether or not this summons new models, no?

With Third Eye, it seems like it's saying "if a spell could put new models on the table, you can't". Meaning if the spell could do so (like if the 13th kills everyone), even if you could also end up not doing so (like if it doesn't kill the last guy, or if you don't have the models), you can't steal it.

To further clarify: you cast the Curse, you remove the models, and then you put new ones on the board. This might not be how the spell works in the fantastic world of Warhammer, but that's how you act it out with the models (unless your opponent is okay with you sculpting and converting 14 of his Chosen into Clanrats). So, even without the above revising of the Third Eye wording (which I believe is necessary because it uses no clarifying jargon to our knowledge), I think you can still say that this spell puts new models on the board. It may be the same number, and even the same plastic figures (if you kill Clanrats to make Clanrats), but you remove some, and then you put the others down.

...yes?

doesn't the 13th say that if you don't have the clanrat models for the new rats then you don't get the unit?


if so the WoC player could get around the "no additional models" line by not having any clanrats to replace them with.

What about only casting the 13th at units of 25+ dudes? Another way around whatever the crap 'summons' means??

- Salvage

and that wouldn't be hard either in a skaven list.

Well, what's the exact wording on 3rd Eye? A key difference could be if a spell could in any situation summon models, compared to whether or not it will in this case, assuming it is stolen, cast, and not dispelled.

It says that if the spell summons additional models or heals models it can't be used.

Well...hm. If the spell does these things, rather than if it can? Poor wording there, since the spell would technically have to be cast for it to summon models, which means it can't be cast.

"heals models": restore wounds to models. That's something we can all agree on, right?

"summons additional models": I feel like the word "additional" is arbitrary and redundant. How would you go about summoning models that are not, in fact, additional? RAW, I would assume that a spell which puts models on the board can't be used, since "summon" isn't a technical term.

So, yes, I suppose you could cast the 13th if either the unit is 25+ guys or you don't have the models, if you ignore the cast-restriction singularity. If it offered the conditional "if this could happen", I'd say no way. As it stands, though, go ahead and mutate those Clanrats into Clanrats, whose friends look on in horror and cut them down as they slowly warp and twist into their new, horrible shapes.

ahhhh, but they are becoming Chaos clanrats so they are even more twisted to please the great changer of ways