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.

Well strictly it was a lie. The spell has a target, and despite being told this repeatedly you then stated it does not havea target.

Your question is meaningless in the context of this spell and engaged units. You cannot be TARGETTED by the spell even once, however if unengaged you CAN be targetted more than once.

Questions is relevant because it they cant be targeted yet still benefit from the within 24" that would mean units in combat would also benefit even though they themselves could not be targeted. I got a final atm... I will support if further later.

Ok, well this is my final reply to this topic:

I have plenty of evidence to assist me to play it the way that I believe it should be played. (They cannot be affected while engaged) and I believe that the other argument holds no water. As for me and my group, we will play it my way. If there happens to be a GW FAQ about how this should be played, we will play it that way. Until then, me and my group, ( and I assumed most others) will play it as they CANNOT be affected if they are engaged in CC.

Also, I play in many tournament throughout the year. This will be something that my opponent and I will discuss before each and every game to make sure we are clear on how this is interpreted by both parties. I willl also talk to TO's about this issue as well. Thanks for the insight everyone!

My two coppers...

LOL at the argument that Cruddace got his own rules wrong.

Tomb King wrote:Questions is relevant because it they cant be targeted yet still benefit from the within 24" that would mean units in combat would also benefit even though they themselves could not be targeted. I got a final atm... I will support if further later.

No, they cannot "benefit" from the spell. They cannot be a valid target, so never become the subject of the spell. It doesnt matter that the spell cannot do anything for them - you never GET to that stage.

Are you a valid target? NO. Then stop. Go no further. Nothing in this spell is relevant to you, you cannot be affected by this spell as you do not fulfil the criteria for being targetted by it.

You are, deliberately or through ignorance, conflating "target" and "affect". The two are separate and distinct concepts.

You have no valid argument on this topci. none.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ragnar4 wrote:LOL at the argument that Cruddace got his own rules wrong.

Happens all the time in Batreps.

LOL at the suggestion that batreps are fully reliable.

If you cast the spell on a unit of skeletons, and they move and are resed, then cast it on the same unit of skeletons again, they won't move, but are still resed. They aren't Affected twice by the movement, but are still targeted and get the lore attribute. But engaged units cannot be targeted so cannot receive the lore attribute.

Which is what weve been saying, but Tombking refuses to listen to.

I'm not suggesting that the Batrep is fully reliable.

I'm suggesting the guy who wrote the book is fully reliable.

I agree with Arion and Nos...If the question about this affecting ENGAGED units is the issue, then there is no issue!

/lock

Thanks all!

But, Ragnar, as Nos pointed out, the rules they might have been playing might not have been the final draft of the rules, since the game was likely played about 6 months ago or more, because the lead time for magazines like WD is HUGE!! thus that MAY have been how the rule was intended to work then, but they made a change to the spell before printing but after the WD article was written.

Arion wrote:But, Ragnar, as Nos pointed out, the rules they might have been playing might not have been the final draft of the rules, since the game was likely played about 6 months ago or more, because the lead time for magazines like WD is HUGE!! thus that MAY have been how the rule was intended to work then, but they made a change to the spell before printing but after the WD article was written.

I wasn't intending for some sort of extrapolated argument demonstrating that I thought that units ought to be able to be healed by spells that can't target them.

RAW is pretty clear, units in combat can't be healed bya Desert Wind.

Here's hoping the FAQ it so that units can! For no other reason than to increase the sheer rules-writing lunacy that GW seems perpetuate They play pretty fast and loose with Lore Attributes and Targeting lately I wouldn't say it's entirely unpossible.

My only argument really. Is that there is an argument that it can be interpreted that they get the lore attribute. Not that they should. To say that there is 100% no possible way they can is wrong is all. I wont be healing them, I am just saying I believe the intent is that they get healed if they are in the area. Fluff wise it makes sense considering the spell and that augment spells still work in combat. We shall wait for an FAQ then I will run back and rub it in some people faces. hehe. Enjoy the army guys.

Back on a good note:

Which spell do you think is the best? The most irreplaceable of all the spells and which one could you really do without?

I would have to say the 5+ ward save bubble is huge for the army. The vortex is stupid and will probably never be cast by me even if I have the dice. lol

No, you cannot interpret it that way. Not without doing what you are doing, which is ignoring the word "target" and pretending it doesnt exist. Or that it somehow means the same as "affect", when it doesnt.

Currently, using the rules written as plain as day, you cannot heal units in combat when using the desert wind spell. No. Way. At. All. Not without changing the rules, aka cheating.

It's quite sad that you would feel the need to "rub it in peoples faces" if they decide to change the rules.

Your other points should go in tactics.

This is madness up in here, folks.

So...Tomb King understands what you guys are saying. I'll admit, I can see where the confusion lay for a while. Clarity is important. But he gets it now. He says as much.

Tomb King: I see what you're saying about how it should be used, but that interpretation can easily go both ways. Cast the spell, all guys within 24" regain d3+1 wounds. Cast the spell, all targets within 24" regain d3+1 wounds. They both fit the feel.
But no matter what seems to make sense, there is currently a correct way to handle the situation, and no amount of wishful thinking will change it.

As for the possibility for anything to be argued...that is true. Descartes has proven that certainty is impossible to achieve, except on the grounds of one's own existence and the impossibility of certainty.
Once we understand that, though, it's time to move on. Your senses may be unreliable. Well, trust them anyway. If you don't, you have nothing to go off of. At all. Ever. So you might as well listen to reason, so you can move past this belief in nothing to play this game.

Overall I would agree with the LM ignore the CB rule.

The spell says "DO X", so you do it. I would need to see the exact wording for CB to make an official ruling.

Hi Parcival

I'm sorry to spoil it but the War Sphinx crew should NOT be getting that many attacks from Ptra's Righteous Smiting. (at least as I see it)

The crew may be modeled as seperately but the whole crew is listed in the army book under 1 entry with 4 attacks not 4 crewmen seperatly with 1 attack each otherwise it would be fine.

The correct way would be
Sphinx 4 attacks plus 1
Crew 4 attacks plus 1

Does that make sence?

Why is this so hard to grasp?

"Khsar's Incantation of the Desert Wind (Signature Spell)"

Desert wind is an augment spell that TARGETS all UNENGAGED friendly Nehekharan Undead Units within 12" The targets can IMMEDIATELY make a normal move as if it were the Remaining Moves sub-phase. The wizard can choose to have this spell target all UNENGAGED friendly Nehekharan Undead units within 24". blah blah blah No unit can be moved by Desert wind more than once per turn (THOUGH THEY CAN STILL BENEFIT FROM THE RESTLESS DEAD LORE ATTRIBUTE).

Why is there an argument!? You cannot target models that are engaged, the spell specifically says it! They went out of their way to call out the fact that this cannot be cast on models that are engaged.

Then the proceeded to call out that you can still cast the spell on targets, however they can only move from Desert Wind once per turn, but they STILL do get the Restless Dead.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

obsidianaura wrote:Hi Parcival

I'm sorry to spoil it but the War Sphinx crew should NOT be getting that many attacks from Ptra's Righteous Smiting. (at least as I see it)

The crew may be modeled as seperately but the whole crew is listed in the army book under 1 entry with 4 attacks not 4 crewmen seperatly with 1 attack each otherwise it would be fine.

The correct way would be
Sphinx 4 attacks plus 1
Crew 4 attacks plus 1

Does that make sence?

Completely incorrect. The book says "Tomb Guard Crew... 1A"
Unit Size? 4 Tomb Guard Crew.

4x1 = 4
4x(1+1)= 8

I believe you read the WARSPHINX has 4 attacks. The Crew have 1 each, and there are 4 of them.

......