Let's talk about Endless Spells

[Jamopower]

8 hours ago, Attackmack said:

Since players alternate moving predatory endless spells at the beginning of each battleround (starting with the player who is to go second in that round) there is always a chance you will get to move that spell. If you move it into your opponents units it will hurt them, you can literally turn your opponents spells against themselves!

Also, PESs CAN be moved across the table edge which dispels them immediately.

 

 

I guess the problem is that you can't move the comet. 

[JackStreicher]

21 hours ago, Marsh said:

Khorne probably will get an answer in time but for the time being is pretty screwed.

An allied caster might help and can cast the cogs which do actually help khorne by helping those bloodletters get that turn 1 charge.

The only other thing to do with the predatory spells is try/ hope to go second and move them first

Dorsn‘t khorne Have a lot of heroes and fleshounds who can dispell?

 

about the Pendulum: you can only move it in the forward direction, the Warscroll is absolutely clear on that.

moving backwards would be an inverted direction this means a direction change which would be against the rules

[AaronWilson]

The problem is Unbinding and Dispelling are 2 different things, Khorne has a fair few things that can attempt to unbind but nothing that allows you to dispel sadly. 

[rokapoke]

2 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

about the Pendulum: you can only move it in the forward direction, the Warscroll is absolutely clear on that.

moving backwards would be an inverted direction this means a direction change which would be against the rules

The absolute clarity of the warscroll indicates setting up the model “lengthwise in the direction you wish it to move.” Unless it has a defined front end/back end, then that just indicates an axis of movement by my interpretation. So you can move it north or south and it’s in that direction (just no turning). It is, after all, a pendulum, and they’re rather notorious for moving in that fashion. 

[AaronWilson]

 I totally disagree that the pendulum can be moved forwards and backwards, that's two different directions.

If I walked forwards 10 yards, did a 180 degree turn and started walking I would be walking in a different direction. To me it's very clear the pendulum goes forward in a straight line, in one direction. 

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, AaronWIlson said:

 I totally disagree that the pendulum can be moved forwards and backwards, that's two different directions.

If I walked forwards 10 yards, did a 180 degree turn and started walking I would be walking in a different direction. To me it's very clear the pendulum goes forward in a straight line, in one direction. 

Ah, but if you moved like a pendulum you wouldn't turn - you'd walk forwards, stop, then start walking backwards. Which means you'd be facing in the same direction but moving in a different direction. Not that it matters - I'm just being a pedant! 

Rules-as-written I'd say the pendulum is only intended to move in one direction. No, that isn't how a pendulum actually works, and it would potentially be a more interesting spell if it could move both ways, but that's not what the warscroll says. When you find yourself having to explain why you think a rule works differently to its face-value interpretation, you're probably wrong in my experience.

To move both ways it would have needed to say something like 'Set up the model length-ways on the linear axis along which it will move. The model can be moved in either direction along this axis.' Simple. But that's not what the rule says. Not even close.

[AaronWilson]

I agree logically a pendulum would move forwards and backwords, logically the pendulum could be swinging back and forth as it moves in that forward straight line. Personally RaW I think it's clear

[ppetford]

The pendulum model clearly has a facing, the blade at the front and the wisps at the back. It’s a really cool model with lots of movement suggested in its sculpt. The rules state that when you place and move it do 2 things

1 - place it lengthways in the the direction you wish it to move

2- whenever it moves, move it in a straight line in THAT direction

If the model was designed to move backwards and forwards point 2 above would surely state “whenever it moves, move it in a straight line in EITHER direction”

[grungolah]

4 hours ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

Ah, but if you moved like a pendulum you wouldn't turn - you'd walk forwards, stop, then start walking backwards. Which means you'd be facing in the same direction but moving in a different direction. Not that it matters - I'm just being a pedant! 

Rules-as-written I'd say the pendulum is only intended to move in one direction. No, that isn't how a pendulum actually works, and it would potentially be a more interesting spell if it could move both ways, but that's not what the warscroll says. When you find yourself having to explain why you think a rule works differently to its face-value interpretation, you're probably wrong in my experience.

To move both ways it would have needed to say something like 'Set up the model length-ways on the linear axis along which it will move. The model can be moved in either direction along this axis.' Simple. But that's not what the rule says. Not even close.

It would also be more interesting if you could only move the pendulum the full move distance in the opposite direction that it last travelled.  Oh well.

[Circus of Paint]

Having gone back and read the Warscroll card, I'll have to admit the wording does state that it is omni-directional.

Whilst rules-wise it is clearer - the background page in Malign Sorcery explicitly states at least twice that it swings "back and forth" - like an actual pendulum.

So the way I see it now - rules say one direction and the fluff says back and forth along the same axis.

Has anyone contact GW to ask about this?

[Overread]

I would say that the pendulum started with one set of rules and fluff that supported each other, but that perhaps playtesting showed that the back-forth motion made it undesirable as a trait or simply resulted it in doing one round of damage against a unit and then forever just swinging back and forth between two players alternating control. Instead the one-direction only approach makes it sound more like it moves with some purpose and can also be more easily controlled to swing-of-table so that it can be recast. 

The other option is that the rules have an omission and that playtesting didn't show this to be an issue and that its something that should be errata fixed. 

 

That's really for GW to choose as we don't know either way at this stage. Either way the rules as written are very clear how it works, this is more discussion on if the rule itself is correct. 

[Circus of Paint]

I would agree on all points there.

Rather than seeing the Pendulum as a smaller more frantic spell going back and forth, I can envision it as you said as a grandiose and lumbering swing across the entire board (perhaps it could take the entire game just to complete one swing!). Rules-wise, the reason the controlling player can choose how far it moves could abstractly represent how their forces would rush to move out of the way, rather that it literally having varying speeds.

[RantingBob]

I'm curious what peoples thoughts were on the Everblaze Comet?  I'm considering taking it in my SCE army along with either Snackles, Cogs (foot slogging army, might help? maybe not with deep strike?), or Geminids.

List for context:
 

Spoiler

Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
- Stormhost: Tempest Lords or none?
Mortal Realm: Aqshy?

Leaders
Lord-Arcanum (180)
- General
- Artefact: Patrician's Helm 
- Spell: Chain Lightning
Knight-Incantor (140)
- Spell: Stormcaller
Lord-Relictor (100)
- Prayer: Translocation
Lord-Celestant On Dracoth (220)
- Tempestos Hammer & Thundershield + something from Aqshy?
- Mount Trait: Keen-clawed

Battleline
10 x Sequitors (240)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 5x Stormsmite Greatmaces
10 x Sequitors (240)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 5x Stormsmite Greatmaces
5 x Liberators (100)
- Warblade & Shield
- 1x Grandblades
5 x Liberators (100)
- Warblade & Shield
- 1x Grandblades

Units
5 x Evocators (200)
5 x Evocators (200)

Battalions
Cleansing Phalanx (120)

Endless Spells
Everblaze Comet (100)
Chronomantic Cogs (60) or something else

 

[Skabnoze]

10 hours ago, AaronWIlson said:

To me it's very clear the pendulum goes forward in a straight line, in one direction. 

That is not a line - it is a vector.

[JackStreicher]

11 hours ago, rokapoke said:

The absolute clarity of the warscroll indicates setting up the model “lengthwise in the direction you wish it to move.” Unless it has a defined front end/back end, then that just indicates an axis of movement by my interpretation. So you can move it north or south and it’s in that direction (just no turning). It is, after all, a pendulum, and they’re rather notorious for moving in that fashion. 

The model has a clear front and backside. 

The „swings like a Pendulum“ is nonsense since it‘s a move not a swing. If you want to see how it works google „Pendulum total war 2“.

at 3:22

the rule is incredibly clear though people are trying to get it wrong. It doesn‘t state AXIS it states DIRECTION which is set by the one summoning it.

 

@Skabnoze

the Rule Says STRAIGHT LINE not VECTOR stop twisting the words of the warscroll...gosh

even as a vector it would be a (0,-1,0) movement which is an inversion of the MOVEMENT DIRECTION.

[Bellfree]

 

1 minute ago, JackStreicher said:

The model has a clear front and backside. 

The „swings like a Pendulum“ is nonsense since it‘s a move not a swing. If you want to see how it works google „Pendulum total war 2“.

the rule is incredibly clear though people are trying to get it wrong. It doesn‘t state AXIS it states DIRECTION which is set by the one summoning it.

Yeah, because how the pendulum works in a video game based off of a completely different tabletop game is SUPER relevant.

[RantingBob]

Surely we just wait for the FAQ on Saturday no?

[Skabnoze]

Just now, RantingBob said:

Surely we just wait for the FAQ on Saturday no?

Is there an FAQ coming on saturday?  That would be cool.

[JackStreicher]

10 minutes ago, Bellfree said:

 

Yeah, because how the pendulum works in a video game based off of a completely different tabletop game is SUPER relevant.

Better than basing it off of „reading between the lines“ because the Pendulum is a Pendulum and thus has to moooove -not swing- back and forth.

 

But hey whenever you are facing forwards but you are walking backwards you apparently also claim that you are moving into the same direction as forward facing while moving forward.

the way it currently is the wording is clear: forward direction, period. All of the rest is wishful thinking.

so let‘s wait for the faq.

[Skabnoze]

9 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

 

@Skabnoze

the Rule Says STRAIGHT LINE not VECTOR stop twisting the words of the warscroll...gosh

I did not twist any words.  A vector has a single direction.  A line does not.

[RantingBob]

4 minutes ago, Skabnoze said:

Is there an FAQ coming on saturday?  That would be cool.

I believe they always do an FAQ 2 weeks after a release don't they?  Or is that only for 40k?

[Skabnoze]

Just now, RantingBob said:

I believe they always do an FAQ 2 weeks after a release don't they?  Or is that only for 40k?

They usually do one soon after.  I have never paid attention to exactly when it is though.  There are enough barnacles on this edition right now that I expect to see one fairly soon though.  There are a number of things they can put to bed with a modestly sized FAQ/Clarifications doc.

[JackStreicher]

5 minutes ago, Skabnoze said:

I did not twist any words.  A vector has a single direction.  A line does not.

Oops sry I misread your posting  you are right ^^

this whole inability to read and instead using false interpretations made me furios. Sorry again.

[Skabnoze]

7 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

the way it currently is the wording is clear: forward direction, period. All of the rest is wishful thinking.

The wording never once specifies a single direction or contains the word "forward".  That is the issue with this rule.

It could work as you proclaim it to, or it could work thematically as a pendulum does.  I can see the argument for either and the rules are semi-ambiguous.  Given GWs penchant for thematic rules I would not at all rule out the possibility that it moves both directions along the line.  It also makes some sense since the idea of moving an opponent's endless spell is a feature of this rule set and a spell that you can only move in the direction the caster wants it to go seems a bit off.

But again, until the devs clear it up we don't know for sure.  So just play it however you and your opponent agree or whatever the decision is for an event if you are playing in one.

[JackStreicher]

1 minute ago, Skabnoze said:

The wording never once specifies a single direction or contains the word "forward".  That is the issue with this spell.

It could work as you proclaim it to, or it could work thematically as a pendulum does.  I can see the argument for either and the rules are semi-ambiguous.  Give GWs penchant for thematic rules I would not at all rule out the possibility that it moves both directions along the line.  It also makes some sense since the idea of moving an opponent's endless spell is a feature of this rule set and a spell that you can only move in the direction the caster wants it to go seems a bit off.

But again, until the devs clear it up we don't know for sure.  So just play it however you and your opponent agree or whatever the decision is for an event if you are playing in one.

It is clear since the model has a front and a back, the word direction is also clearly defined in the English language.

I could imagine though that the faq might even change the Pendulum so it is equal to the other spells which means: they might add both DIRECTIONS