Jump to content

Sword of unholy power


Dragon10

Recommended Posts

Interesting. :)

I believe intuitively people read "can summon summonable units with the death keyword" and therefore I think it's the way to do it. But that's the old RAW versus RAI discussion.

But to give your question some more merit there are other warscrolls/abilies that summons non-summonable units for example the bray-shaman can summon a Chaos Monster, the fluffy choice is maybe a Ghorgon but Archaon is also a monster. 

So maybe a necromancier summons Nagash to counter the bray-shamans Archaon. xD

 

Edit: Reading the wording it says allowed to cast a spell that summons models with the DEATH keyword and there are no spell that summons Nagash so....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to cast a spell that summons models...

This isn't a spell in itself it simply allows you to use one without having to actually cast it. 

Nagash doesn't have the summon nagash spell on his warscroll and as such no spell exists and so cannot be cast. 

The bray shaman example is different in that it's a spell that specifically states he can summon any chaos monster. 

 

The big difference here is that there is no spell to summon nagash however the bray shaman has a spell to summon monsters.

So no. You can't summon nagash.

The addition of "with the death keyword" is to stop you summoning a bastilladon etc or other none death units that can be summoned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can summon with the unholy sowrd, but it has to be a unit that has ruels tho allow to be summones as rules.

The advantage of the unhoy sword is that:

1) it can be given to a Hero that is not even a magus

2) ignore cast value

3) ignore dispelling attempting

4) it can summon indifferently the calue of models (es 10 or 20 skeletons) till you have the right amount of points avalaible

 

But it can only summon, as @BrocknerTheBear said you have firstly to have the rule in the unit that you want to summon that allow it to be summones.

Ie. You can summon the Terrogheist GA:Death version but you can't summon the FEC version of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, someone2040 said:

This is because you don't actually make a casting roll, so can't roll higher than X to see if you get the bonus.
 

But you can't fail to make the higher roll either since you always succeed...

I hadn't thought of your way to read the rule since I thought main purpose of taking the sword as your artifact was to guarantee beating the higher roll. But I guess this is probably something they should clarify in GH2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, someone2040 said:

The way i have read it and ruled it for my event is you can only summon the minimum numbers not maximum. This is because you don't actually make a casting roll, so can't roll higher than X to see if you get the bonus.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 

Nope. You don't need a casting roll, so every casting is successful, not care about the result. So why do you force to be the minimum? You choose. You don't get bonus or malus. You simply evoke, nothing about the minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. You don't need a casting roll, so every casting is successful, not care about the result. So why do you force to be the minimum? You choose. You don't get bonus or malus. You simply evoke, nothing about the minimum.

Mate, no need to be so aggressive. But the wording is explicitly "if the casting roll was a 10 or more, set up a unit of ip to 20 skeleton warriors instead".

If you choose to interpret a choice, thats up to you. But to me, that's pretty clear. Did you roll a 10 or more? No, because you didn't roll any dice when you cast the spell. And that's why I've chosen to rule it as such for my event.

 

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, someone2040 said:


Mate, no need to be so aggressive. But the wording is explicitly "if the casting roll was a 10 or more, set up a unit of ip to 20 skeleton warriors instead".
If you choose to interpret a choice, thats up to you. But to me, that's pretty clear. Did you roll a 10 or more? No, because you didn't roll any dice when you cast the spell.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 

where do you see aggressivity?

No. You read wrongly. I cast the spell succesfully automatically so where say it's succesful only in the bottom roll?  Even if the spell woould require a summon of 13+  I would still be able to have the summon.

I cast a summon, don't care about rolling dice or so on. I decide what unit and waht result to apply to it. Stop.

Eveerythiig else is your deduction based on nothing.

"The beares is allowed to cast a spell that summon models with DEATH" keyword to the battlefield".

I use that spell, I cast it, don't refer to minimal, max or so on. I decide to cast it and I choose the result. The only limit is by the amout of points I have to do and it's not related to the artifact itself.

You gain automatic success, it doesn't care about the roll you do (or you don't do).

If you want to point on the cast value, even the normal casting says you have to obtain a certain cast and that cast is a roll. You hae to roll the dice to cast. Simply you don't do and choose the roll result automatically.

It's not different to say that the cast walue to evoke 20 is Y. 

If you say "you didn't roll" beh... you didn't roll even in the first part so you'd forbid yourself about using the artifact itself.

You simply use automatically the cast, the result it's something you decide, not anything is talked about.

Everything else is your invention, not rule based.

Mine is not interpretation, but as the rules are written, you can see in a different way, but yours It's a HR and moreover based on nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@someone2040 With respect to Deynon, he's not a native English speaker so perhaps the tone may seem more confrontational than he intends.

Personally I run it as achieving only the minimum value in lieu of it actually saying it is successfully cast on an actual value. As you say, you bypass the Casting Roll altogether, and thus you can't use the number on said roll to decide how many models you set up.

To use an analogy, if you had two active abilities, one where on a Hit roll of 6+ you do a Mortal Wound, and another than allows you to automatically Hit, you wouldn't count all the rolls as 6s because you'd bypassed the Hit rolls, therefore the condition never activates that allows you to inflict Mortal Wounds.

By the same token, you bypass the Casting Roll with the SoUP, and thus you don't activate the condition where you set up more models for rolling higher.

I mean Deynon, you were the one getting irate enough to get a thread closed about how we must exactly follow the letter of the rules, so this seems a bit flimsy coming from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm it would be interesting to have more people weight in here since this a huge nerf on the artifact. Espesially interested how it's played at larger UK tournaments.

To have an artifact that automaticaly makes you pass the higher summoning roll is quite good while a artifact that makes you pass a roll of 5 is much much weaker. 

There is still one use left and that's summoning morghast but that's very onedimential.

If this is the case I would rather that they change the sword to +3 on summoning roll or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CoffeeGrunt said:

@someone2040 With respect to Deynon, he's not a native English speaker so perhaps the tone may seem more confrontational than he intends.

Personally I run it as achieving only the minimum value in lieu of it actually saying it is successfully cast on an actual value. As you say, you bypass the Casting Roll altogether, and thus you can't use the number on said roll to decide how many models you set up.

To use an analogy, if you had two active abilities, one where on a Hit roll of 6+ you do a Mortal Wound, and another than allows you to automatically Hit, you wouldn't count all the rolls as 6s because you'd bypassed the Hit rolls, therefore the condition never activates that allows you to inflict Mortal Wounds.

By the same token, you bypass the Casting Roll with the SoUP, and thus you don't activate the condition where you set up more models for rolling higher.

I mean Deynon, you were the one getting irate enough to get a thread closed about how we must exactly follow the letter of the rules, so this seems a bit flimsy coming from you.

It's a totally different example.

Here both have a cast value. One at 5 and one at 10 (it's an example). Both are obtained  rolling dice (also the thirst value). Simply the sword make you successful in the casting. Not care about the result, the cast is successful so you can choose the result it refers to, cause in both case it represent a cast vlaue.

 

About the analogy to hit. In the case you have to both hit to roll a 6 and you hit automatically and caue a mortal wound it would be such. Cause to hit a have to obtain a 6+ so it's the result I gain. The case you'd have to refer to have to refer It's : I have a 5+ to hit and to 6+ I obtain a mortal wound cause here I only hit and I hit automatically (cause some rules). In this case there can be a debate cause both visions are plausible.

In the case of the cast is different cause it's the same than having two cast. The real difference is that even if you cast the bigger one as roll you can downgrade the models to the first cast. If you cast automatically you simply obtain the result it needs to have the effect. If it can have more results you can choose with one.

 

es example: FAQ Dicember 2016, pag.4

Q: Is it possible for modifiers to make a hit, wound or save roll automatically successful? For example, a save roll of 3 or more with a +2 modifier. A: Yes. In this example, the save would be made automatically.
 

You can see that it doesn't refer to the result, only to the succefulness.

Obviouly if there will be (I didn't find them at actual state) that says otherway everything change. But such it isn't. So such it is.

 

 

We don't have to follow the rules absolutely,  I only ask to refer to the rules as such: rules. Then you can modify as you want. It's only to be said and not to be made as something due. I didn't become irate anyway in that topic, simply I continuesd to reply that modifynot a problem but not saying the modified ones are the original rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also believe @someone2040 has it right here.

It's subtle but the intention is, in my personal opinion mind, in the context of the spells themselves.

Take this example from the Skelton warriors war scroll. The casting roll required is stated. As is the condition to be followed on success - in this case, the placement of up to 10 skeletons. 

However, should the "casting roll" be higher then 10, you can place up to 20. 

The sword allows you to instantly successfully cast. When this spell is succefully cast you place up to 10 skeletons. There is no level of success here. If you fail you place none. If you pass you place 10. 

However. If your casting roll is higher the 10 you pace twenty. 

No roll is taken with the sword. You simply succefully cast with no roll Needed. 

The option to place twenty is, as stated in the rule, only possibly on a casting roll of...not a succefull cast of. 

As much as I would dearly love to have a failsafe way of summoning max sized units in my opponents exposed flank or backbline, it's simply not the case.

 

 

Screenshot_2017-03-12-19-46-49.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

both ate casting values. The first is 5, the second 10. You continue ti firet that also the first value 5 is obtained by rolling dice. It's simply a single magic with 2 different value of casting. The sword let you choose wich one point to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@deynon They are indeed. 

However the first the the roll required to succeed. The sword allows you to automatically succeed.  

The second however is not the roll Needed to succeed but rather a roll that "if reached" allows for double the unit size. 

As the sword allows you to automatically succeed then once that condition is met the spell allows you to summon 10 skeletons. There is no opertunity to achieve a higher roll and thus a higher result. 

In matched play pretty much every TO or opponent would rule it this way. 

Hopefully they will clarify 100% in GHB2, but until then unfortunately I just can't see it ever going the way your interpreting it outside of open or narrative play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BrocknerTheBear said:

@deynon They are indeed. 

However the first the the roll required to succeed. The sword allows you to automatically succeed.  

The second however is not the roll Needed to succeed but rather a roll that "if reached" allows for double the unit size. 

As the sword allows you to automatically succeed then once that condition is met the spell allows you to summon 10 skeletons. There is no opertunity to achieve a higher roll and thus a higher result. 

In matched play pretty much every TO or opponent would rule it this way. 

Hopefully they will clarify 100% in GHB2, but until then unfortunately I just can't see it ever going the way your interpreting it outside of open or narrative play.

also the 10 value cast is a success. Nothing say about the success should be the miñimum one. You con't have to roll. Also cast 5 value requires a roll so it's useless to refer to rolling tl separate the two values.

In a TO should be made clear as a HR in the notes of the TO itself.

O hoòe too it will be clarified, even if it wpuld not require a GH2, but a simple FAQ... even if considered the last ones I'm not so sure about the resolvong of one instead if a more confused act

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@deynon I have a feeling we will all simply have an agree to disagree moment at the end of all this haha

Its not the roll that's important. It's simply the wording of the spell. It stated that "if successfully cast" set up a unit of up to 10 skeletons. 

That's the important part. It exlicitly states that upon succefully casting you place 10 skeletons.  

"If the roll to cast was 10 or more".

You havnt rolled a ten or more. As much as you also havnt rolled a 5 or more. However you have succefully cast. And as the wording of the spell on the scroll states. Upon successfully casting. 

The numbers arnt important as neither number can be rolled. So any outcome involving a roll cannot be obtained. 

However placing 10 skeletons is achieved on a succefull cast. And that's what the sword auto awards you.

I can't see it being any clearer no matter how badly I also want your version to be right (and I do, I really do as black knights would be so useful all of a sudden) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 6 is also a success, or a 7, or 8, or anything between 5 and infinity, really. Unless you can provide a rule stating that it succeeds at the maximum possible value, I'm afraid that you'll have trouble convincing your opponents.

You can write as many rants on here as you want about it, but ultimately it's the person across the table you have to convince, and to paraphrase you from a previous thread, "the rules as written are the Magna Carta."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BrocknerTheBear said:

@deynon I have a feeling we will all simply have an agree to disagree moment at the end of all this haha

Its not the roll that's important. It's simply the wording of the spell. It stated that "if successfully cast" set up a unit of up to 10 skeletons. 

That's the important part. It exlicitly states that upon succefully casting you place 10 skeletons.  

"If the roll to cast was 10 or more".

You havnt rolled a ten or more. As much as you also havnt rolled a 5 or more. However you have succefully cast. And as the wording of the spell on the scroll states. Upon successfully casting. 

The numbers arnt important as neither number can be rolled. So any outcome involving a roll cannot be obtained. 

However placing 10 skeletons is achieved on a succefull cast. And that's what the sword auto awards you.

I can't see it being any clearer no matter how badly I also want your version to be right (and I do, I really do as black knights would be so useful all of a sudden) 

for you the rolling is important, but it's the same of 5 caste, you cast both successful, it's the same.

7 hours ago, CoffeeGrunt said:

A 6 is also a success, or a 7, or 8, or anything between 5 and infinity, really. Unless you can provide a rule stating that it succeeds at the maximum possible value, I'm afraid that you'll have trouble convincing your opponents.

You can write as many rants on here as you want about it, but ultimately it's the person across the table you have to convince, and to paraphrase you from a previous thread, "the rules as written are the Magna Carta."

ut's you to have tomshow me the opposite. A success is a success.

The rules are the Magna Carta give md reason. I don't have to convince, only to apply rules. If modified we have to know beforehand.

Ehm... why should be mine the rants ahd not yours ones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Countmoore said:

Play nice guys. We all know this is the Mourngul summoning sword anyway ?

Or Harbringers. ☺️ But I have been toying with the idea of forward deploying for example 6 Spirit Host.

But you play it as min summon also?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...