Switch Theme:

The "Destroyer" vs Magic Banners  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




No, that isnt what that states, at all.

You suffer a wound... - once this is resolved, you THEN reveal the magic item. If you fail to wound, it gets warded etc, you still resolve the "must then" part, as it is NOT contingent on there having been an unsaved wound. YOu can tell this, because it does not state "if an unsaved wound is caused, the owning player must then..."

All it states is an order - wound first, then reveal magic items.
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, that isnt what that states, at all.

You suffer a wound... - once this is resolved, you THEN reveal the magic item. If you fail to wound, it gets warded etc, you still resolve the "must then" part, as it is NOT contingent on there having been an unsaved wound. YOu can tell this, because it does not state "if an unsaved wound is caused, the owning player must then..."

All it states is an order - wound first, then reveal magic items.


That is not what must then means. Then is a word that means in succession of. You do the wound. THEN you reveal all items. There is no other way that this can be interpreted, without misusing the word.

A simple example of the use of then being: "He opened the door, then said hello."

It's the same here. You can't have said hello, without using the preceding action. Just like you can't reveal any items, without completing the preceding action, which is wounding.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Yes, I understand it requires an order. I stated as such, right there in my post. What you are misunderstanding is that it does not require a *successful* wound (i.e. you roll sufficient to wound score, the opponent then wasunable to save it) - just that you follow the sequence. The sequence is: try to wound them (with rules on how you do so) THEN you try to destroy any magic item they have.

If you fail to wound, you still can destroy an item. RAW
   
Made in us
Inspiring Icon Bearer





 thedarkavenger wrote:
 Thunderfrog wrote:
You also CAN destroy a magic banner with Arcane Unforging.

Unlike the rules for melee attacks, which are very specific.

P.48

"If a model is touching enemies with different characteristic profiles, it can choose which one to attack when it's turn to strike comes."

P.94

Profile and Wargear

"A standard bearer always has the same profile as the other rankand file models in his unit. [...more stuff, not relevant]"

Standard Bearers and Casualties

"We assume that if the standard bearer is slain, another warrior will step forward to raise the fellows standard aloft. The standard bearer cannot normally be removed as a casualty unless only he and the champion remain alive in the unit. This applies even if the standard bearer is the target of an effect that targets a single model, such as dangerous terrain or an attack made with the Sniper special rule."

Arcane Unforging

"Target a single enemy model. It suffers a wound on a dice roll equal to or greater than it's unmodified armor save. (Models with no save cannot be wounded.) No armor saves are permitted against a wound caused by this spell. The owning player must then reveal to the caster all the magic items possessed by the target, if any. If the target has one ore more magic items, randomly select one of them. That item is immediately destroyed on a roll of 2+ and cannot be used for the rest of the game." [...more stuff, talking about how it cant target blown out bound items or one use items that have been used.]..


So..

Step 1, choose a target.

You CAN choose the standard bearer with a SPELL. We know this to be true because of this line from standard bearers.

"This applies even if the standard bearer is the target of an effect that targets a single model"

Step 2. Resolve spell.

The spell has 3 distinct phases.

A. Do you wound?

This isn't super important, as the wound isn't necessary. And when you resolve a spell, you resolve ALL of it's affects, so it really doesn't matter if we kill the standard bearer or whiff completely. (Which is likely. Most RnF have 5+ or less saves.)

B. Select an item.

Most of them only have one. Note that the spell doesn't say "If he is still alive...", so you finish resolving the spell. Show me your items and I roll randomly.

C. Destroy.

2+ or better.





The rules for Arcane unforging are as follows: "The target model suffers a wound equal to it's unmodified armour save. > The owning player must then reveal all magic items."

Note the underlined. This means that you only reveal the magic items if, and after, you suffer the wound. If you fail to wound, or it gets warded, you don't reveal them. And as standard bearers have 1 wound, they die, so you can't reveal the magic item as it's dead.



You are absolutely incorrect.

Any spell with a "if successful" qualifier states it explicitly.


"No armor saves are permitted against a wound caused by this spell. The owning player must then reveal to the caster all the magic items possessed by the target, if any."


Tell me how "must then", defines a success or fail condition. It's an order of events moniker and nothing more.

There are numerous examples of success or fail conditions. Here is every one from every spell in the game. Notice how they very clearly define it as an and/or event.

Lore of High Elves

Tempest: "...hit by the template suffer a strength 3 hit. If a unit suffers any successful wounds by this spell, it suffers a ..."

Lore of Fire

The Burning Head: "...each model in it's path suffers a strength 4 hit. Any unit suffering casualties must ..."

Lore of Metal

Final Transmutation: "..is removed on a roll of 5+. (6+ for multi-wound models). If any wounds are suffered..."

Lore of Light

Net of Amyntok: "..must take a strength test any time it ....If it fails, it cannot ..."

Lore of Death

Fate of Bjuna: "If target survives, it suffers from stupidity...."

Lore of Dark Magic

Chillwind: .."suffers 2d6 Str 2 hits. If the target suffers any wounds.."

Soul Stealer: " ...suffers a strength 2 hit. For each unsaved wound..."

Lore of the Wild


Mantle of Gorok: "...and d6 strength. If either dice is a 6 the model suffers..."

Skaven Lore of Ruin

Skorch: "..any unit that suffers a wound must take a panic test."



Other examples of "Then" being an order of events moniker. Notice none of these say, if successful, but "then", just like Arcane Unforging.



Lore of Dark Magic

Power of Darkness: "have their strength increased by 1. Then add d3 power dice to your power pool..."

Lore of Beasts

Transformation of Kadon: ".."then, remove the model and replace it with a ..."

Demonic Transformation (Chaos Warriors:

"..Then, remove the model and replace it with a demon prince..."

Lore of Slaanesh


Slicing Shards: "..suffers d6 Str4 AP hits. Then the unit must .."

Lore of Tzeentch

Tzeetch's Firestorm: "..within 30 inches. You must then scatter.."









Age of Sigmar, New World Tournament Ruleset


[centerPlease feel free to pop in and comment, or send me a PM![/center]



 
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

If is not a success or fail condition. It is a cobditional. It means that there is a chance of a second outcome. Success, or failure. All of those spells have 3 possible outcomes,
Arcane Unforging has two.

1. You do a wound, then the target reveals items.

2. You don't do the wound. In this case, the items are not revealed as the terms of the reveal are not met.

That is how English works. Please, acquaint yourself with a dictionary.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in us
Inspiring Icon Bearer





Please stop repeating your position over and over and assuming it to be true.

Please leave smart-assery out of this.

Please realize you are one person among many who feel this way.

Please realize that in the 20 examples above you, GW spells out when a wound must be successful for an effect to proc.

Please see you are wrong.

You are free to house-rule the game however you wish. If you aren't willing to show any logic behind your answer I'm done with you. Anyone reading this thread with half a brain can see you are wrong.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/06/25 17:14:53




Age of Sigmar, New World Tournament Ruleset


[centerPlease feel free to pop in and comment, or send me a PM![/center]



 
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

 Thunderfrog wrote:
Please stop repeating your position over and over and assuming it to be true.

Please leave smart-assery out of this.

Please realize you are one person among many who feel this way.

Please realize that in the 20 examples above you, GW spells out when a wound must be successful for an effect to proc.

Please see you are wrong.

You are free to house-rule the game however you wish. If you aren't willing to show any logic behind your answer I'm done with you. Anyone reading this thread with half a brain can see you are wrong.



I'm not being smart about anything.

I'm informing you how English works.

From the Oxford Dictionary website definition of then; "After that; next; afterwards:"


That literally means, after you do a wound, you reveal the magic item. Only after the wound is done.

And even if you did, the model is dead. So you cannot destroy the item, as a standard bearer is a 1 wound model, and another model picks up the standard, so to speak.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 thedarkavenger wrote:
If is not a success or fail condition. It is a cobditional. It means that there is a chance of a second outcome. Success, or failure. All of those spells have 3 possible outcomes,
Arcane Unforging has two.

1. You do a wound, then the target reveals items.

2. You don't do the wound. In this case, the items are not revealed as the terms of the reveal are not met.

That is how English works. Please, acquaint yourself with a dictionary.

Please, do yourself a small favour, and reread the rule printed.

Now you have done that, underline the if then condition for us. Explicitly state where IF a wound is caused THEN you reveal the items.

Once yo realise you cannot do that, because there is no such phrasing in there, just a simple sequencing statement, please recant your position in good humour and grace.
   
Made in us
Inspiring Icon Bearer







That literally means, after you do a wound, you reveal the magic item. Only after the wound is done.

And even if you did, the model is dead. So you cannot destroy the item, as a standard bearer is a 1 wound model, and another model picks up the standard, so to speak.


Thank you for at least being civil.

I understand HOW you could read it that way, but surely you must see that EVERY OTHER SPELL IN THE GAME specifically lists "if, then"

It seems that we disagree on interpretation, but ask your mates at your club next time you go. I have a feeling the overwhelming majority will point you towards our interpretation as well.

Resolve wounds. Roll for item destruction.

To the second part, you can always not kill the model. Even if you do, the entire spell resolves, including item destruction.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/25 22:24:58




Age of Sigmar, New World Tournament Ruleset


[centerPlease feel free to pop in and comment, or send me a PM![/center]



 
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

 Thunderfrog wrote:


That literally means, after you do a wound, you reveal the magic item. Only after the wound is done.

And even if you did, the model is dead. So you cannot destroy the item, as a standard bearer is a 1 wound model, and another model picks up the standard, so to speak.


Thank you for at least being civil.

I understand HOW you could read it that way, but surely you must see that EVERY OTHER SPELL IN THE GAME specifically lists "if, then"

It seems that we disagree on interpretation, but ask your mates at your club next time you go. I have a feeling the overwhelming majority will point you towards our interpretation as well.

Resolve wounds. Roll for item destruction.

To the second part, you can always not kill the model. Even if you do, the entire spell resolves, including item destruction.


Everyone I've spoken to has agreed with me, and this is how we play it, in fun games and in a competitive setting, as far as I'm aware, in the UK.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in us
Inspiring Icon Bearer





Perhaps its a regional thing. I've played 3 cons and 4 tournaments, and no one has ever made the leap that the wound must occur for the item to be destroyed..

Again, largely due to the lack of "if successful", which as I've shown is GW standard across every army and every spell in 8th edition.



Age of Sigmar, New World Tournament Ruleset


[centerPlease feel free to pop in and comment, or send me a PM![/center]



 
   
Made in gb
Nimble Pistolier





Belfast

TDA, there are four outcomes:
1: No Wound, no items broken
2: Wounded, no item broken
3: No Wound, item broken
4: Wounded, item broken

here are two absolute statements in the spell description, "...suffers a wound on armour save..."
and
" Must then..."
The latter is in no way reliant on the other succeeding. As they are two separate sentences the second phase, "must", will be done after the first sentence is resolved.

So yes, after resolving the potential wound on the armour save, you move on to the item showing. There is literally nothing in the description that says a wound MUST be done first.
Especially as virtually every other instance where there IS a conditional "follow on", it's explicitly stated so.

(TDA, you're a tournament player right? how do your TO's resolve it so far? The past three (non ETC) Iv been to since High Elves dropped all treated it exactly the same way, and allowed it)
((FWIW, this is NOT to get into the ETC vs vanilla debate, BUT ETC currently allow unforging to hit standards, and dont require any wounds to be caused. ))


But on the original question I had, to some of you, thanks for the clarification, just my interpretation was wonky.

The Men of Ostermark 6K

http://japehlio.blogspot.com/

Custom Insignia? Theming an army? I take sculpting commissions. PM me for more information. 
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

 japehlio wrote:
TDA, there are four outcomes:
1: No Wound, no items broken
2: Wounded, no item broken
3: No Wound, item broken
4: Wounded, item broken

here are two absolute statements in the spell description, "...suffers a wound on armour save..."
and
" Must then..."
The latter is in no way reliant on the other succeeding. As they are two separate sentences the second phase, "must", will be done after the first sentence is resolved.

So yes, after resolving the potential wound on the armour save, you move on to the item showing. There is literally nothing in the description that says a wound MUST be done first.
Especially as virtually every other instance where there IS a conditional "follow on", it's explicitly stated so.

(TDA, you're a tournament player right? how do your TO's resolve it so far? The past three (non ETC) Iv been to since High Elves dropped all treated it exactly the same way, and allowed it)
((FWIW, this is NOT to get into the ETC vs vanilla debate, BUT ETC currently allow unforging to hit standards, and dont require any wounds to be caused. ))


But on the original question I had, to some of you, thanks for the clarification, just my interpretation was wonky.


I play under Mohammer comp/FAQ, and in a competitive setting, it never comes up, as the lore is abysmal. But when I did talk about it, it was unanimous. The wound is dealt, then(in succession) if the wound is dealt, the items are revealed.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in gb
Nimble Pistolier





Belfast

well, most HE lists I see have at most a lvl2 with High, even just to get the +1 to ward buff...

The Men of Ostermark 6K

http://japehlio.blogspot.com/

Custom Insignia? Theming an army? I take sculpting commissions. PM me for more information. 
   
Made in us
Inspiring Icon Bearer





 thedarkavenger wrote:
 japehlio wrote:
TDA, there are four outcomes:
1: No Wound, no items broken
2: Wounded, no item broken
3: No Wound, item broken
4: Wounded, item broken

here are two absolute statements in the spell description, "...suffers a wound on armour save..."
and
" Must then..."
The latter is in no way reliant on the other succeeding. As they are two separate sentences the second phase, "must", will be done after the first sentence is resolved.

So yes, after resolving the potential wound on the armour save, you move on to the item showing. There is literally nothing in the description that says a wound MUST be done first.
Especially as virtually every other instance where there IS a conditional "follow on", it's explicitly stated so.

(TDA, you're a tournament player right? how do your TO's resolve it so far? The past three (non ETC) Iv been to since High Elves dropped all treated it exactly the same way, and allowed it)
((FWIW, this is NOT to get into the ETC vs vanilla debate, BUT ETC currently allow unforging to hit standards, and dont require any wounds to be caused. ))


But on the original question I had, to some of you, thanks for the clarification, just my interpretation was wonky.


I play under Mohammer comp/FAQ, and in a competitive setting, it never comes up, as the lore is abysmal. But when I did talk about it, it was unanimous. The wound is dealt, then(in succession) if the wound is dealt, the items are revealed.


Fascinating. It's considered fairly good here, as there are tons of hordes and Convocation does a great job with that. After you put that caster in your PG, you only need one spell off for a unit wide 3++



Age of Sigmar, New World Tournament Ruleset


[centerPlease feel free to pop in and comment, or send me a PM![/center]



 
   
Made in gb
Nimble Pistolier





Belfast

I think what TDA was getting at is that you rarely see much of the lore in use, as most people only want one spell to get that 3+...

The Men of Ostermark 6K

http://japehlio.blogspot.com/

Custom Insignia? Theming an army? I take sculpting commissions. PM me for more information. 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 thedarkavenger wrote:
 japehlio wrote:
TDA, there are four outcomes:
1: No Wound, no items broken
2: Wounded, no item broken
3: No Wound, item broken
4: Wounded, item broken

here are two absolute statements in the spell description, "...suffers a wound on armour save..."
and
" Must then..."
The latter is in no way reliant on the other succeeding. As they are two separate sentences the second phase, "must", will be done after the first sentence is resolved.

So yes, after resolving the potential wound on the armour save, you move on to the item showing. There is literally nothing in the description that says a wound MUST be done first.
Especially as virtually every other instance where there IS a conditional "follow on", it's explicitly stated so.

(TDA, you're a tournament player right? how do your TO's resolve it so far? The past three (non ETC) Iv been to since High Elves dropped all treated it exactly the same way, and allowed it)
((FWIW, this is NOT to get into the ETC vs vanilla debate, BUT ETC currently allow unforging to hit standards, and dont require any wounds to be caused. ))


But on the original question I had, to some of you, thanks for the clarification, just my interpretation was wonky.


I play under Mohammer comp/FAQ, and in a competitive setting, it never comes up, as the lore is abysmal. But when I did talk about it, it was unanimous. The wound is dealt, then(in succession) if the wound is dealt, the items are revealed.

I've never seen it played that way in the UK. Not a single person I know agrees with that interpretation.

The rule as written places no condition on a successful wound being dealt beofre you can move on to the second part of the spell resolution. It simply doesnt do so, and there is no way to read it such that it places such a condition, as literally no conditional language is used.

Ordering is used (deal wound, then destroy item) however ordering is itself not a condition.
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
 thedarkavenger wrote:
 japehlio wrote:
TDA, there are four outcomes:
1: No Wound, no items broken
2: Wounded, no item broken
3: No Wound, item broken
4: Wounded, item broken

here are two absolute statements in the spell description, "...suffers a wound on armour save..."
and
" Must then..."
The latter is in no way reliant on the other succeeding. As they are two separate sentences the second phase, "must", will be done after the first sentence is resolved.

So yes, after resolving the potential wound on the armour save, you move on to the item showing. There is literally nothing in the description that says a wound MUST be done first.
Especially as virtually every other instance where there IS a conditional "follow on", it's explicitly stated so.

(TDA, you're a tournament player right? how do your TO's resolve it so far? The past three (non ETC) Iv been to since High Elves dropped all treated it exactly the same way, and allowed it)
((FWIW, this is NOT to get into the ETC vs vanilla debate, BUT ETC currently allow unforging to hit standards, and dont require any wounds to be caused. ))


But on the original question I had, to some of you, thanks for the clarification, just my interpretation was wonky.


I play under Mohammer comp/FAQ, and in a competitive setting, it never comes up, as the lore is abysmal. But when I did talk about it, it was unanimous. The wound is dealt, then(in succession) if the wound is dealt, the items are revealed.

I've never seen it played that way in the UK. Not a single person I know agrees with that interpretation.

The rule as written places no condition on a successful wound being dealt beofre you can move on to the second part of the spell resolution. It simply doesnt do so, and there is no way to read it such that it places such a condition, as literally no conditional language is used.

Ordering is used (deal wound, then destroy item) however ordering is itself not a condition.


I never said there was a condition. Then is a term for succession. If you complete A, you resolve B in succession. If you fail A, you don't get B. As per the rules of the English language, that is how you have to interpret the wording.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in us
Evasive Eshin Assassin





So...I'm gonna try to break this down a bit.

"Target a single enemy model. It suffers a wound on a dice roll equal to or greater than it's unmodified armor save..."

Okay. So you pick a model, and it suffers a wound on a successful roll.

"The owning player must then reveal to the caster all the magic items possessed by the target."

So, after a model "suffers a wound on a dice roll equal to or greater than it's unmodified armour save", you try to destroy an item.
I really can't see how the first part needs to be successful for the second to take place. Because the conditional isn't "the target takes a wound", but "the target takes a wound on a dice roll equal to or greater than it's unmodified armour save".

 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Tda- no, that isn't how you have to interpret it, at all. You have required the second part to fulfil a condition that simply is not present. As per the rules of the English language, you are entirely wrong.
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Tda- no, that isn't how you have to interpret it, at all. You have required the second part to fulfil a condition that simply is not present. As per the rules of the English language, you are entirely wrong.


Actually. Listen to what I'm saying. Then is a term for succession.

Now. I've proven that.

So, let's find out what succession means, as you people clearly don't know what it means.


A number of people or things of a similar kind following one after the other

Okay. Now we've cleared that up, let me explain how it works.

You complete step A. If successful, you start step B. Without completing Step A, the succession fails.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in us
Inspiring Icon Bearer






It seems that since 4 tournament players telling you that you are wrong isn't enough, I've fired off an email to GW support. They usually pick up rules questions in about 48 hours.

Although I doubt that even Matt Ward and Jack Kirby showing up at your doorstep telling you how it plays would convince you at this point.

You're just being obtuse. Succession is used in ZERO other spells of the game without exact wording preceding it. I don't know why you think this one case is special.

If the spell said " ...deal a wound, no armor saves allowed. IN SUCCESSION, DEPENDENT UPON THE FIRST ACTION."

Or, in shorter terms, as you put it yourself.. IF Successful. They always put IF SUCCESSFUL if an item must occur for another to continue.



Age of Sigmar, New World Tournament Ruleset


[centerPlease feel free to pop in and comment, or send me a PM![/center]



 
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

It seems that since 4 tournament players telling you that you are wrong isn't enough, I've fired off an email to GW support. They usually pick up rules questions in about 48 hours.

Although I doubt that even Matt Ward and Jack Kirby showing up at your doorstep telling you how it plays would convince you at this point.

You're just being obtuse. Succession is used in ZERO other spells of the game without exact wording preceding it. I don't know why you think this one case is special.

If the spell said " ...deal a wound, no armor saves allowed. IN SUCCESSION, DEPENDENT UPON THE FIRST ACTION."

Or, in shorter terms, as you put it yourself.. IF Successful. They always put IF SUCCESSFUL if an item must occur for another to continue.


I'm not being obtuse. I'm following the rules of the English language.

And I never once said that it's if successful. No matter how much you say it's conditional, it will not make it conditional. A succession depends on the success of the previous step. The clue is kind of in the name. And, I'm afraid, until GW confirm it either way, as per the writing of the rules, that is how it works.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/27 08:20:51


Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in us
Inspiring Icon Bearer





You complete step A. If successful, you start step B. Without completing Step A, the succession fails.


You did actually, mention that there is an "if successful" condition.

And further, the argument here is that because the spell, like all other 20 spells I listed earlier, does NOT list the item destruction as "if successful", that doing the wound has NOTHING to do at all with breaking an item.



Age of Sigmar, New World Tournament Ruleset


[centerPlease feel free to pop in and comment, or send me a PM![/center]



 
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

 Thunderfrog wrote:
You complete step A. If successful, you start step B. Without completing Step A, the succession fails.


You did actually, mention that there is an "if successful" condition.

And further, the argument here is that because the spell, like all other 20 spells I listed earlier, does NOT list the item destruction as "if successful", that doing the wound has NOTHING to do at all with breaking an item.



No. I used if, in explaining how succession works. I, at no point, mentioned that there was a conditional in the spell itself.

Allow me to put it into simple terms:

A succession depends on the success of the previous step. And the use of the word then, makes the spell a succession.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
Made in us
Inspiring Icon Bearer





Even though no other spell in the game does?

Even though every other spell in the game uses the "if successful" moniker?



Age of Sigmar, New World Tournament Ruleset


[centerPlease feel free to pop in and comment, or send me a PM![/center]



 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




The "success" of the previous step is rolling to wound. Once you do that, you have successfully completed that step.

You are requiring a specific result of that step. No such language allows that. Proven

You remain wrong in this. Accept and move on
   
Made in us
Killer Klaivex




Oceanside, CA

More importantly, their is a good reason the spell is worded the way it is phrased. If we didn't have a set sequence, I would destroy your item first, then roll to wound, and you might have just lost your ward save.

As it is, you attempt to process the wound, then you attempt to destroy an item.

-Matt

 thedarkavenger wrote:

So. I got a game with this list in. First game in at least 3-4 months.
 
   
Made in gb
Nimble Pistolier





Belfast

TDA, let me put it another way;


"I am going to attempt to go to the shop, THEN I am going to attempt to do some laundry"

Two "attempt" phrases, separated by a "then". If I dont go to the shop, my sentence still implies that I will be attempting to do some laundry, at no point is the success of one determining the attempt of the second.

The Men of Ostermark 6K

http://japehlio.blogspot.com/

Custom Insignia? Theming an army? I take sculpting commissions. PM me for more information. 
   
Made in gb
Sinister Shapeshifter




The Lair of Vengeance....Poole.

 japehlio wrote:
TDA, let me put it another way;


"I am going to attempt to go to the shop, THEN I am going to attempt to do some laundry"

Two "attempt" phrases, separated by a "then". If I dont go to the shop, my sentence still implies that I will be attempting to do some laundry, at no point is the success of one determining the attempt of the second.



Attempt is a conditional. Therefore, the succession applies to both success and failure. If, however, there is no conditional, like in, let's say, the spell in question , succession depends on success.

Malifaux masters owned: Guild(Sans McCabe), Outcasts(Sans Misaki), Arcanists(Sans Marcus)

Check my blog that I just started: http://unionfaux.blogspot.co.uk/ 
   
 
Forum Index » The Old World & Legacy Warhammer Fantasy Discussion
Go to: