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.

So I'm pretty sure that both of these come down to house rules and ask your opponent answers but I wanted to see what the popular opinion was on the two items.

1. Do the effects of the same spell cast by different sources stack? Example, multiple arcane shields, multiple bloodsecrator banners etc.

2. Can a summoned unit summon another unit and theoretically just keep bringing infinite troops on to the table? Example, pink horrors chain summoning pink horrors.

1) by default there's nothing preventing the same spell from stacking when cast by different wizards (remember that a given wizard can't cast the same spell twice in a turn, even if they are allowed to cast more than one spell per turn). Not allowing multiple instances of the same effect to stack is, however, a common house rules.


2) nothing prevents a summoned unit from summoning more units, but let me ask you this: why would that be a problem? In vanilla Age of Sigmar, there is no functional limit to how many units and models you can deploy at the start of the game, so any unit you summon could have just been deployed at the start instead. Summoning is thus, by default, just an alternate deployment method, like deep strike in 40k, and not something that would let you field more units than you normally be allowed to, otherwise.

Maybe you and your opponents have agreed to some arbitrary limit on the amount of models you bring to the table in the interest of trying to play an approximately even game, whether that limit is a formal comp system or an informal gut check? If so, I'm sure you've agreed to apply that limit to ALL the models and units you bring to the game, REGARDLESS of whether you're deploying them at the start or summoning them from reserve later, right?

Right?

Because it would OBVIOUSLY be completely unfair to arbitrary limit one player to only X amount of stuff, while allowing the other player to play with 2X or 3X amount of stuff just because they happen to be playing a faction with summoning spells, when in vanilla play summoning is just an alternate deployment ability, right? That would be like making a house rule for 40k that deep striking units don't count towards points limits. Ridiculous, right?

Right? Right. Obviously.

Glad we got that squared away.

My understanding is both are fine RAW.

When not playing competitively (so not using points, just playing in the local GW) I never take the above to the extreme - for example I might place 2 Mystic Shields on my Empire swordsmen but never 4 (which would make them invincible bar mortal wounds and rend -2 weapons).

If my opponent starts summoning summoners to summon or making invincible units etc then that's an invitation to "gloves off" in my eyes ;-) and my Necromancer starts summoning as many nasties as I can muster alongside my other 3 wizards piling on the Mystic Shields.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Malisteen wrote:

2) nothing prevents a summoned unit from summoning more units, but let me ask you this: why would that be a problem? In vanilla Age of Sigmar, there is no functional limit to how many units and models you can deploy at the start of the game, so any unit you summon could have just been deployed at the start instead.

If you're playing vanilla AoS with the Sudden Death rules things can get trickier (I.e. When the opponent takes few models at the start to gain sudden death and then summons up a much larger horde).

There are many, many ways of abusing sudden death. One could deploy nothing but dragons. One could deploy a single unit of carrion, invoke sudden death, pick endure, and declare victory. Sudden Death is its own problem entirely unrelated to summoning.

The fact that sudden death rules are broken by default does not change the fact that in vanilla AoS, any summoned unit could just as easily have been deployed instead, making summoning an alternate deployment method, not a means of fielding more units than would be allowed to your opponent, and when taken as an alternate deployment method there is nothing wrong or unbalanced or game ruining about summoning.

Any arbitrarily imposed system restricting deployed forces, whether formal or informal, must maintain this balance, otherwise its the house ruled force restrictions, and not the summoning rules, that are the problem. When normal deployment is limited but deployment via summoning is not, then of course your game is going to fall apart. Again, that's like saying units in reserve in 40k don't count towards points restrictions. It obviously wouldn't work.

Sure, I agree with many of your points. But summoning is a way to get Sudden Death and to outnumber your opponent, and that can be problematic.

There's nothing to stop you summoning slain units back into existence too, and that's not something you could do via normal deployment except for special scenarios that allow recycled reinforcements.

Not just sudden death. Any scenario where victory trigger is based on starting models is affected by summoning.

 Bottle wrote:
There's nothing to stop you summoning slain units back into existence too, and that's not something you could do via normal deployment except for special scenarios that allow recycled reinforcements.

How exactly are you summoning slain units back in a way that is mechanically different from summoning an entirely separate unit which could have been deployed to start? Allowing someone to 'summon back' a slain unit is no different from allowing them to walk any other slain unit back on from reserves. If you're allowing both, sure, fine, but if you're allowing one and not the other then, again, it's your house rules that are the problem.

 Malisteen wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
There's nothing to stop you summoning slain units back into existence too, and that's not something you could do via normal deployment except for special scenarios that allow recycled reinforcements.

How exactly are you summoning slain units back in a way that is mechanically different from summoning an entirely separate unit which could have been deployed to start? Allowing someone to 'summon back' a slain unit is no different from allowing them to walk any other slain unit back on from reserves. If you're allowing both, sure, fine, but if you're allowing one and not the other then, again, it's your house rules that are the problem.

Yep, true. Although people don't often have 2 Great Unclean Ones in their case, so while hypothetically they could have deployed two are the start of the game, practically speaking, it allows players to field two of a unit which they only have one. - again, deem it not a problem if you feel so. For me it can be problematic.

And if we're taking stuff to hypothetical extremes, summoning would allow you to go beyond the size limit of your deployment zone with models. You could fill up every inch of your deployment zone and then summon some more on top.

The practical takeaway remains that if you're going to limit the forces that the players are going to bring to the table, that's fine, a good thing, even. I heartily recommend doing so! Just, if you are doing that, don't leave an obvious loop hole that will let some armies easily circumvent those restrictions that you put in place.

The easiest and most natural and effective way to do that is to simply declare available reserves (including declaring that you want to be able to, say, re-summon unit X once if it dies), allowing both players to take that into account when balancing forces, whether doing so through a comp system or just informally gut checking the sides.

Yes, I will agree that setting limitations across the board is the best thing to do - in fact not doing so has recently soured my fun a little in some games because tip-toeing around decisions in game like "Is summoning a unit skeletons to block my opponent's advance a slice of strategic brilliance on my part, or me being TFG and tipping the balance in my favour with too many models..." can be tactically unsatisfying - I like to know the limitations from the start because once the dice start rolling I like to play to win.

The best question to ask is why would you ever play a game against any of these people?

Possibly because not all of us have a lot of variety available in opponents willing to play age of sigmar, and finding reasonable boundaries that 'these people' can agree to up front may be easier for some of us than finding 'other people' to play against for whom such boundaries wouldn't be necessary in the first place.

Also, it's not an easy, cut and dry division. I was, without at all intending to be, 'that guy' in more than one early game of age of sigmar when it comes to summoning, souring some players opinions on the game without meaning to. Going from the 'summoning is part of the points I pay for the wizard' mind set to the 'summoning is an alternate deployment method' mind set is an obvious shift in retrospect, but often one that needs to be pointed out to players used to the old game, even if they aren't deliberately trying to abuse things or break the game.

Heres how we have been playing this lately.

1-Yes stacking shields is fine,though no one has yet to spam casters enough to try it in force.

2- Yup,chain summoning is fine,in fact its a regular thing with our Daemon players but they don't have a ton of models so its usually a base unit of Pinkies summoning another base unit,,and it doesn't always work out that well.

The big thing we are working with now is not allowing the recycling of dead models,as dead models are "removed from play" and don't seem to be sent back into the "reserve models awaiting fate to lend a hand"..anyhow,,,interpretation,I know.But certainly undead players or any case in which models can be brought in and its stated that they can even come from dead or slain models,we certainly allow the dead pool to be tapped.Doing it this way has certainly cut down on cases of games ending up being big grind fests,,though we usually have time limits too.

As for summoning vs deployment,,yes I like to put everying on the table,even my summoning models.However there are instances in Battleplans were summoning models "forward"on the first turn can be a pretty big advantage especially if I end up going first.Or if Im facing a lighting strike army or one that can appear anywere on the board ,having a unit that can respond to their drop is nice too

Here's what I would like to know: Why was all this complaining about summoning models not 'on your army list' not present during WHFB, when Vampire Counts armies could literally summon as much as they wanted (provided they had the models)? Because I see little difference between the two.

As for tactical advantages and such, think about it from the narrative perspective that allegedly guides GW on how AoS plays out: If I'm a powerful Chaos Sorcerer with the ability and skill to summon daemons to help my army and do my bidding, why exactly wouldn't I do that as early and often as I could? Same for Necromancers.

I really think people are reading WAY too much into this summoning thing, at least as far as mechanics go.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
Here's what I would like to know: Why was all this complaining about summoning models not 'on your army list' not present during WHFB, when Vampire Counts armies could literally summon as much as they wanted (provided they had the models)? Because I see little difference between the two.

the difference is that in oldhammer you couldn't summon models who could then summon more models and fall into an endless loop of summoning.

There are many differences between oldhammer summoning and newhammer summoning.

Among them, units that could be summoned or re-juvinated by magic phased a number of penalties to balance out the assumption that they would be getting free models during the game. Undead were unstable (as opposed to AoS where bravery 10 undead troops are among the most stable in the game). On their cheaper models, their stats were considerably worse than their points cost would otherwise imply, so that you ended up starting with less of them than other armies would if running equitable troops (just as you would in Age of Sigmar if you count summonable reserves towards your total force)

Also, spells were harder to get off. You had to roll them randomly, they were easier to oppose (no range limit on dispels), dice pools had to be managed across spells (as opposed to every wizard getting the same chance to cast their spell or spells regardless of how many spells have already been cast this turn).

Also, until the end times, the units that could be outright summoned were very few (basically just zombies), and while end times opened up summoning for more units, those spells had very high casting values, making them very difficult to cast. The opportunity cost was also greater. Yeah, you might summon a whole new unit with Ryse, but the same effort you put into that spell could have been put into pit of shades or purple sun, spells that generally removed entire units from the board. The opporunity cost in terms of the other spells you're giving up to cast summoning is nowhere near that high in age of sigmar.

So yeah, if you treat summoning in Age of Sigmar like you did in WHFB, just bonus units that don't count for army size or whatever, then you're going to have a bad time. Because none of the controls and costs that balanced that kind of summoning exist in AoS.

Answer to both questions is yes. There has been some debate on the first one in the past but the recent Grand Alliance Chaos book included several FAQ notes, one of which stated "multiple bonuses are cumulative" but as many have also said its a common house rule to say multiple bonuses from the same spell/ability don't stack. It actually works quite well.

As for those trying to balance summoning; try PPC (see my signature) it tackles summoning better than anything else I've seen. Basically a given wizard can be upgraded to have access to their army's summoning spell, which can summon a certain point value of models based on the level you chose to cast it at.