Curse of Years vs. Chaos Rune Shields

[Cayseymax]

Hi...

How does Arkhan the Blacks Curse of Years spell interact with Chaos Runeshields of the Slaves to Darkness Chaos Warriors/Knigts???

The way I see it, there are two ways of going about it.

1. You roll the whole of the spell, and if you reach MW on 1+, that unit is simply dead, because you could choose to say: "I'm going to keep roling until I do 1000 MW..." So even with a 33.33% chance enough wounds will go through and the unit is dead

2. You check against every MW the spell yields, when it happens. This would mean that the target could end the spell by saving both before and after Arkhan would do MW on a 1+. 

Question is, which one is it? Can the Chaos Runeshields end Curse of Years? And if so, is that the RAW or the RAI ruling?

Thanks!

[rokapoke]

Resolve the entire spell, then roll to ignore the wounds. 

[Cayseymax]

On 5/11/2018 at 1:54 PM, rokapoke said:

Resolve the entire spell, then roll to ignore the wounds. 

So lets assume I get to 1. I'll then just say I'm going to roll 100 times. and then the Chaos player rolls 100 dice to try to save? Could I choose to say I'm rolling 1000, or 1.000.000 times? Making the Chaos player roll 1.000.000 saves?

[EMMachine]

11 minutes ago, Cayseymax said:

So lets assume I get to 1. I'll then just say I'm going to roll 100 times. and then the Chaos player rolls 100 dice to try to save? Could I choose to say I'm rolling 1000, or 1.000.000 times? Making the Chaos player roll 1.000.000 saves?

After there is no rule that 1 is always a miss this rule, when arriving at "rolls of 1+" the spell will role infinite, so its impossible to save all.

I think the main point is, that the Chaos Shield triggers for suffering mortal wounds, but only the effect (losing a wound) is ignored. The wound should be still "suffered" in that case that lets Arkan roll the additional dice with the better roll.

[boots468]

Since the Daughters of Khaine FAQ, I'm not sure that's the case any more - that one says "If a wound or mortal wound is allocated to Morathi and then negated, does it still count as one of the maximum of 3 wounds and/or mortal wounds that can be allocated to her that turn? A: No. When a wound is negated, it no longer counts as having been allocated to a model".

Unless we're saying inflicted and allocated are different rules-wise (and they might well be, but seems unlikely to me), then if after any round of dice rolling, all the mortal wounds are saved by the Runeshield, then Arkhan has not inflicted any wounds that round of rolling, and the spell immediately stops. It really could do with an official FAQ though...

[Richelieu]

This conversation is moot.  The exact text of the spell says that the unit suffers a mortal wound AND you roll another die.  It does not say IF it suffered a mortal wound as the result of the spell, roll another die.

You do both things.  They are not dependent.  It is irrelevant to the other if one of the things is negated.

 

[boots468]

Text on the spell is:

"If successfully cast, pick an enemy unit within 18" of the caster that is visible to them and roll ten dice.
For each roll of 6, that unit suffers a mortal wound and you can roll an extra dice. For each roll of
5+ on these extra dice, the target suffers another mortal wound and you can roll another dice. Now, for
each roll of 4+, the target suffers another mortal wound and you can roll another dice. Keep rolling
dice in this way, inflicting mortal wounds and reducing the roll needed to cause them by 1 each time,
until either no wounds are inflicted or the target unit is destroyed."

So, for example if you get down to needing a 3+ and have two dice left, and make both 3+ rolls but opponent then makes their mortal wound spell saves, then in that time of rolling no wounds were inflicted so you stop rolling (from the last sentence of the spell's text).

[Richelieu]

Inflicting comes before allocating. 

Inflict on unit > allocate to model.

Wounds are inflicted regardless of the outcome of the allocation and Morathi's FAQ only refers to allocation.

[boots468]

Okay, I can see that argument, and you could well be right here! Before the Morathi FAQ I would probably have agreed entirely with you, but it seems odd if passing a mortal wound save entirely negates the allocation, but does not negate the infliction. Neither specific word is even in Arkhan's spell and the whole subject is quite woolly. Are there any other FAQs about wounds or mortal wounds allocation / infliction / suffered / negated? I had a quick look through and couldn't spot any.

If saves against mortal wounds weren't meant to stop the spell, the line " until either no wounds are inflicted or..." could have been written instead "until either no dice pass the roll required or..."

[Cayseymax]

On 5/18/2018 at 5:51 PM, boots468 said:

If saves against mortal wounds weren't meant to stop the spell, the line " until either no wounds are inflicted or..." could have been written instead "until either no dice pass the roll required or..."

Would I be correct in saying that it seems that the spell says two different things?

One the one hand, the spell is completely controlled by the casters dice rolls, and cares not for whatever the taget might have of mw-saves and on the other it seems that its controlled by whether or not the target actually takes the damage.

In terms if this contradiction, would it be reasonable to say that the RAI is that the spell runs on the casters rolls, and not the targets abilities???

If it were so, the target could still save individual damage, but not end the spell....