Crawd wrote:Since the spell says that you can allocate only 1 of those hits on the champion or the characters in the unit. You can choose to allocate the hits where you want.
That's the mother of non-sequitors if ever I saw one.
Bladewind and warmachine crews
Moderator: The Dread Knights
That's the mother of non-sequitors if ever I saw one.
"Give a man a fire, keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life!"
W : D : L (7th Edition)
6 : 1 : 4
W : D : L (7th Edition)
6 : 1 : 4
We'll probably need a FAQ on this, but let's try and look at this in detail.
1) Every sort of ranged attack, plus a good number of other types of special attacks specify that they are distributed in the same manner as with shooting. Blade Wind does not.
2) Spells that cause Hits or Wounds are distributed like shooting attacks (BRB p. 110, "Spells Commentary" 2nd paragraph, "When any spell inflicts a number of hits or wounds on a target unit, these are distributed in the same way as hits from normal shooting, unless differently specified in the spell's description.").
One could argue that a successful Attack causes a Hit, and thus the Blade Wind spell does in fact cause Hits. However, why then bother specifying the spell as causing Attacks with their own WS and S? Personally I'd say that it must be because the spell differs from the norm described in the BRB.
3) Blade Wind provides 3D6 Attacks with WS4 & S4. The attacks themselves are carried out as if the target was under attack by an enemy in close combat.
3a) War Machines can respond to a Charge by either Holding or Fleeing (BRB p. 86 under "Charge Responses"). The War Machine is not Charged, however, so we must assume that the Crew can only Hold.
3b) BRB p. 86, "Close Combat". "During the close combat phase, enemy models fight the crew and attached characters as normal...A war machine that is attacked in close combat is assumed to have a WS of 0 and is therefore hit automatically. If the machine has no crew left to defend it at the end of a combat the enemy automatically destroys the machine..."
To me this basically means that if a war machine with crew is attacked in close combat, and if the crew doesn't flee, then the crew will be able to attack the chargers (assuming that the chargers don't kill them before they get to attack). What the section does NOT say, however, is that the chargers can ONLY attack the crew. The fact that there is a paragraph detailing what happens if the attackers choose to aim for the machine in stead, suggest to me that the attackers can, in fact, CHOOSE WHETHER THEY WILL ATTACK THE CREW OR THE MACHINE!!! The crew will participate in the combat in order to be able to strike back at the enemy, but they can not prevent the enemy from trying to attack the machine itself.
My Conclusion:
If the Blade Wind spell does in fact cause the war machine and it's crew to be under attack, as if in close combat, then the spellcaster can in fact CHOOSE HOW MANY ATTACKS GOES AGAINST RESPECTIVELY THE CREW AND THE MACHINE!!! Attacks against the Crew will have to attack the crew and hit against their WS etc., and attacks against the machine will hit automatically, and go straight to the To Wound part.
Blade Wind is thus an exceedingly dangerous spell when used to attack war machines with!
Additionally you could argue that if a War Machine has been abandoned by it's crew, then a Blade Wind spell can destroy the machine automatically, as the spell causes the machine to be attacked in close combat. And according to the BRB p. 86 "Close Combat", then a war machine without crew at the end of a combat, is automatically destroyed.
1) Every sort of ranged attack, plus a good number of other types of special attacks specify that they are distributed in the same manner as with shooting. Blade Wind does not.
2) Spells that cause Hits or Wounds are distributed like shooting attacks (BRB p. 110, "Spells Commentary" 2nd paragraph, "When any spell inflicts a number of hits or wounds on a target unit, these are distributed in the same way as hits from normal shooting, unless differently specified in the spell's description.").
One could argue that a successful Attack causes a Hit, and thus the Blade Wind spell does in fact cause Hits. However, why then bother specifying the spell as causing Attacks with their own WS and S? Personally I'd say that it must be because the spell differs from the norm described in the BRB.
3) Blade Wind provides 3D6 Attacks with WS4 & S4. The attacks themselves are carried out as if the target was under attack by an enemy in close combat.
3a) War Machines can respond to a Charge by either Holding or Fleeing (BRB p. 86 under "Charge Responses"). The War Machine is not Charged, however, so we must assume that the Crew can only Hold.
3b) BRB p. 86, "Close Combat". "During the close combat phase, enemy models fight the crew and attached characters as normal...A war machine that is attacked in close combat is assumed to have a WS of 0 and is therefore hit automatically. If the machine has no crew left to defend it at the end of a combat the enemy automatically destroys the machine..."
To me this basically means that if a war machine with crew is attacked in close combat, and if the crew doesn't flee, then the crew will be able to attack the chargers (assuming that the chargers don't kill them before they get to attack). What the section does NOT say, however, is that the chargers can ONLY attack the crew. The fact that there is a paragraph detailing what happens if the attackers choose to aim for the machine in stead, suggest to me that the attackers can, in fact, CHOOSE WHETHER THEY WILL ATTACK THE CREW OR THE MACHINE!!! The crew will participate in the combat in order to be able to strike back at the enemy, but they can not prevent the enemy from trying to attack the machine itself.
My Conclusion:
If the Blade Wind spell does in fact cause the war machine and it's crew to be under attack, as if in close combat, then the spellcaster can in fact CHOOSE HOW MANY ATTACKS GOES AGAINST RESPECTIVELY THE CREW AND THE MACHINE!!! Attacks against the Crew will have to attack the crew and hit against their WS etc., and attacks against the machine will hit automatically, and go straight to the To Wound part.
Blade Wind is thus an exceedingly dangerous spell when used to attack war machines with!
Additionally you could argue that if a War Machine has been abandoned by it's crew, then a Blade Wind spell can destroy the machine automatically, as the spell causes the machine to be attacked in close combat. And according to the BRB p. 86 "Close Combat", then a war machine without crew at the end of a combat, is automatically destroyed.
-
Getwisteerd
- Highborn
- Posts: 614
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 1:30 pm
- Location: The duke's forest (yes that's the name of the town I live in)
It's really, really simple.
Either you choose to deal with these attacks as CC attacks as far as targetting goes, this means that you can choose any model in base contact with the sorceress. Unfortunatly, you can't cast spells into combat so this spell would be prety useless.
Or you choose to use the ranged way of targetting for these attacks (as page 110 of the rules supports). In this case you would actually be able to target models not in BtB contact, which has my preference.
Of course, in either case you'll have the exception that you can allocate up to one attack on a champion/character.
Using parts of both to get the most benefit from the targetting rules is, in my opinion, cheating.
Either you choose to deal with these attacks as CC attacks as far as targetting goes, this means that you can choose any model in base contact with the sorceress. Unfortunatly, you can't cast spells into combat so this spell would be prety useless.
Or you choose to use the ranged way of targetting for these attacks (as page 110 of the rules supports). In this case you would actually be able to target models not in BtB contact, which has my preference.
Of course, in either case you'll have the exception that you can allocate up to one attack on a champion/character.
Using parts of both to get the most benefit from the targetting rules is, in my opinion, cheating.
getwisteerd wrote:It's really, really simple.
Either you choose to deal with these attacks as CC attacks as far as targetting goes, this means that you can choose any model in base contact with the sorceress. Unfortunatly, you can't cast spells into combat so this spell would be prety useless.
Or you choose to use the ranged way of targetting for these attacks (as page 110 of the rules supports). In this case you would actually be able to target models not in BtB contact, which has my preference.
Of course, in either case you'll have the exception that you can allocate up to one attack on a champion/character.
Using parts of both to get the most benefit from the targetting rules is, in my opinion, cheating.
Let me get this straight. You say that the spell should play as either:
a) You can assign hits to anyone the Sorceress is touching in btb contact, which unfortunately won't mean anyone, as the spell can't be cast in close combat?
or B) Attacks from the spell is distributed like normal shooting attacks because it's a ranged attack?
I'm sorry to say this, but if I'm not misunderstanding what you write/mean, then there's partly something that you get wrong about casting spells in combat, and then a couple of issues that your post isn't addressing.
1) The spell isn't a magic missile, and thus it can be cast in close combat, though only against the opponent that the Sorceress is in close combat against (the unit that is, not the individual model in btb contact). I don't believe that this is explicitly stated in the BRB, but it is an official ruling from 6th ed. Unless people believe that it's been invalidated with the onset of 7th ed., then I'll argue that it still stands.
2) If you could only make attacks against an opposing unit that is in btb contact with the Sorceress, then why does the spell even have a range? You don't move the Sorceress when you cast the spell, so what I read you saying is that the spell thus can't attack anyone from afar, making it more or less useless, and at least making the range part of the spell irrelevant. I'm sorry, but to me this proposal simply doesn't make any sense. If I misunderstand you, could you pls. try to elaborate on what you mean.
3) If the spell is supposed to distribute the Attacks like normal shooting, why would GW not just use the same template they use on god knows how many other kinds of ranged and special attacks? And I'm not buying an argument that it's simply an oversight on their part. This is just too basic an issue to be a f***up on their part. They have too much experience with attack descriptions for regular ranged attacks to mess this up.
-
Mordru
- Malekith's Best Friend
- Posts: 1060
- Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2002 5:07 am
- Location: Plotting the return of the Cult of Pleasure
@ Kyrel
Unless the spell description specifically allows it to be cast into close combat (or you are skaven) you cannot cast it into combat even against a unit your caster is in combat against.
@ getwisteered
I beg to differ that is really simple. The close combat attack language may simply refer to whether the attacked unit gets to use hth AS values or ranged attack AS values. There are a host of other issues as well that hvae cropped up in this and several other threads.
Unless the spell description specifically allows it to be cast into close combat (or you are skaven) you cannot cast it into combat even against a unit your caster is in combat against.
@ getwisteered
I beg to differ that is really simple. The close combat attack language may simply refer to whether the attacked unit gets to use hth AS values or ranged attack AS values. There are a host of other issues as well that hvae cropped up in this and several other threads.
To strive, to persevere, to conquer.
@Mordru
I can't say that you can't be right, but I'm 99% certain that this issue was FAQed in 6th ed. We are in complete agreement that you can't make a ranged attack at a unit in close combat, unless some "special" rule for the specific attack specifically states that you can. I'm pretty certain that the FAQ stated that a mage in close combat couldn't use magic missiles. But I'm also pretty certain that it was ruled that a mage in close combat can cast spells that affect either herself, or the the unit she's in combat with, as long as it's not a spell that deals damage like a shooting attack. Likewise the mage can target units outside of the combat, as long as the spell doesn't require LOS.
I've been looking for the FAQ in question, but unfortunately I can't see it. I'll admit that I can be mixing up an official FAQ with a FAQ from our local club, but I don't think so.
Can you point to a place in the BRB where this issue is covered explicitly? I don't question that you can't shoot into close combat (BRB p. 26), and I don't question that you can't cast magic missiles when you are in combat (BRB p. 110), nor that spells that distribute hits or wounds like from shooting can't be cast from or into hth combat (unless specified in the spell). But I can't seen to find anything else on other types of spell. Neither one way or the other.
I can't say that you can't be right, but I'm 99% certain that this issue was FAQed in 6th ed. We are in complete agreement that you can't make a ranged attack at a unit in close combat, unless some "special" rule for the specific attack specifically states that you can. I'm pretty certain that the FAQ stated that a mage in close combat couldn't use magic missiles. But I'm also pretty certain that it was ruled that a mage in close combat can cast spells that affect either herself, or the the unit she's in combat with, as long as it's not a spell that deals damage like a shooting attack. Likewise the mage can target units outside of the combat, as long as the spell doesn't require LOS.
I've been looking for the FAQ in question, but unfortunately I can't see it. I'll admit that I can be mixing up an official FAQ with a FAQ from our local club, but I don't think so.
Can you point to a place in the BRB where this issue is covered explicitly? I don't question that you can't shoot into close combat (BRB p. 26), and I don't question that you can't cast magic missiles when you are in combat (BRB p. 110), nor that spells that distribute hits or wounds like from shooting can't be cast from or into hth combat (unless specified in the spell). But I can't seen to find anything else on other types of spell. Neither one way or the other.
-
Getwisteerd
- Highborn
- Posts: 614
- Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 1:30 pm
- Location: The duke's forest (yes that's the name of the town I live in)
Kyrel wrote:Let me get this straight. You say that the spell should play as either:
a) You can assign hits to anyone the Sorceress is touching in btb contact, which unfortunately won't mean anyone, as the spell can't be cast in close combat?
or B) Attacks from the spell is distributed like normal shooting attacks because it's a ranged attack?
Exactly
IIRC, you can't cast spells into CC if the spell description does not explicitly state that you can, but I'm to lazy to look it up right now, as it is not really importantI'm sorry to say this, but if I'm not misunderstanding what you write/mean, then there's partly something that you get wrong about casting spells in combat, and then a couple of issues that your post isn't addressing.
1) The spell isn't a magic missile, and thus it can be cast in close combat, though only against the opponent that the Sorceress is in close combat against (the unit that is, not the individual model in btb contact). I don't believe that this is explicitly stated in the BRB, but it is an official ruling from 6th ed. Unless people believe that it's been invalidated with the onset of 7th ed., then I'll argue that it still stands.
2) If you could only make attacks against an opposing unit that is in btb contact with the Sorceress, then why does the spell even have a range? You don't move the Sorceress when you cast the spell, so what I read you saying is that the spell thus can't attack anyone from afar, making it more or less useless, and at least making the range part of the spell irrelevant. I'm sorry, but to me this proposal simply doesn't make any sense. If I misunderstand you, could you pls. try to elaborate on what you mean.
Glad we agree that it doen't make any sense, leaves the second option, right?
3) If the spell is supposed to distribute the Attacks like normal shooting, why would GW not just use the same template they use on god knows how many other kinds of ranged and special attacks? And I'm not buying an argument that it's simply an oversight on their part. This is just too basic an issue to be a f***up on their part. They have too much experience with attack descriptions for regular ranged attacks to mess this up.
"distributed exactly like hits from shooting" is what you're referring to? I can't say that I know, but on the other hand, if it was meant that attacks could be allocated to anyone you wish, why didn't they put that in the spell description? The most important thing here is that even in CC you can't just target anyone you wish,
EDIT:
BRB p 107 wrote:Wizards cannot cast spells at units engaged in close combat, unless the spell only affects the caster himself or the spell's description specifies otherwise
-
Confused counselor
- Corsair
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 6:19 pm
The problem with the spell is as follows:
The spells causes close combat attacks. However, close combat attacks have one thing this spell does not state: a base from which they come (well, a model with a base). Normally, this does not matter as the spell deals with characters in units. Against war machines, however, your base contact dictates what you are attacking.
Now, normally, you cannot attack the machine because the crew is in front of the machine (unless you have a flank charge or possibly spears). However, since the spell is not actually a close combat phase, this does not happen.
There are basically two ways to deal with them, neither of them waterproof, but one has more backing it up:
1. You can only attack the crew.
2. You can attack either the crew or the warmachine with each attack.
There is nothing suggesting you count as only in base to base contact with the crew. In fact, you can attack every model in the unit once (in the case of characters and champions) , even those ( I think ) that aren't in the front rank or even in the middle of the unit. (Skaven leading from the back and Damsels respectively). This proves nothing, but suggest that you are considered to be in base contact with the entire unit. Therefor 2 seems to be the most logical explanation. AFAIK there is no actual proof backing anything up, however.
The spells causes close combat attacks. However, close combat attacks have one thing this spell does not state: a base from which they come (well, a model with a base). Normally, this does not matter as the spell deals with characters in units. Against war machines, however, your base contact dictates what you are attacking.
Now, normally, you cannot attack the machine because the crew is in front of the machine (unless you have a flank charge or possibly spears). However, since the spell is not actually a close combat phase, this does not happen.
There are basically two ways to deal with them, neither of them waterproof, but one has more backing it up:
1. You can only attack the crew.
2. You can attack either the crew or the warmachine with each attack.
There is nothing suggesting you count as only in base to base contact with the crew. In fact, you can attack every model in the unit once (in the case of characters and champions) , even those ( I think ) that aren't in the front rank or even in the middle of the unit. (Skaven leading from the back and Damsels respectively). This proves nothing, but suggest that you are considered to be in base contact with the entire unit. Therefor 2 seems to be the most logical explanation. AFAIK there is no actual proof backing anything up, however.
-
Lord woulfe
- Trainee Warrior
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 12:11 am
- Location: kidnapping, killing, pillaging and plundering somewhere... probably
Lord Woulfe wrote:just thought of this, but if you did dirrect it at a unit of grail knights or of a unti of giant slayers, then each model is hit once, if the amount is under the 3d6, instead of the entire 3d6
What? No... just no.
"Give a man a fire, keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life!"
W : D : L (7th Edition)
6 : 1 : 4
W : D : L (7th Edition)
6 : 1 : 4
@Confused Counselor
Where do you find something in the rules that says that you can only attack the crew of a war machine when you charge it, and the Crew elects to "Hold" as a charge reaction? I've been going over the War Machines section several times now, and I can't find anything that outright says that you can only attack the crew. The text does say that you fight the crew, but the text also goes into detail about attacking the machine itself under two different circumstances: War machines with a crew (remaining) and war machines without a crew (remaining). If you can't attack a war machine that still has crew left, what would be the point of going through the process of actually describing how you do it?
Where do you find something in the rules that says that you can only attack the crew of a war machine when you charge it, and the Crew elects to "Hold" as a charge reaction? I've been going over the War Machines section several times now, and I can't find anything that outright says that you can only attack the crew. The text does say that you fight the crew, but the text also goes into detail about attacking the machine itself under two different circumstances: War machines with a crew (remaining) and war machines without a crew (remaining). If you can't attack a war machine that still has crew left, what would be the point of going through the process of actually describing how you do it?
-
Dalamar
- Dragon Lord
- Posts: 9675
- Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:42 pm
- Location: Designing new breeds of Dragons
Simply because crew forms up in front of the machine as charge reaction then the charging unit can't attack the machine because they are not in base contact with it.
Or charging war machine with two units from two opposite sides. One unit fights the crew while the other unit takes the machine apart.
If you can't attack a war machine that still has crew left, what would be the point of going through the process of actually describing how you do it?
Or charging war machine with two units from two opposite sides. One unit fights the crew while the other unit takes the machine apart.
-
Confused counselor
- Corsair
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 6:19 pm
*Doh* Sorry. Missed that one.
But it still leaves us with the question of how we handle the Blade Wind. Normally spells that target units can't specifically hit characters (ignoring very low number of troops...), but otherwise the rest of the unit is fair game. In close combat normally only models that are in btb contact can attack, but a model can slay more models than it is touching, as it's assumed that the model steps forward to get in range of other targets. Obviously there is no btb contact with Blade Wind, and all models in the unit can potentially be hit at least once. Can we therefore assume that we can view all models in the unit as potentially counting as being in btb contact with an enemy? If that's the case, then both crew and war machine ought to be fair game.
Which then brings us full circle back to the issue of how to divide the attacks from the Blade Wind *Sigh*
Damn it. For a moment I kinda thought that I'd managed to wrap my head around this one.
Logically I'd say that the attacking spellcaster ought to be able to distribute the number of attacks as he or she pleases, since we are talking about close combat attacks, and the mage arguably would count as being in btb contact with both crew and machine, but on the other hand this might be a little too good.
As I opened up saying, "We'll need a FAQ on this".
But it still leaves us with the question of how we handle the Blade Wind. Normally spells that target units can't specifically hit characters (ignoring very low number of troops...), but otherwise the rest of the unit is fair game. In close combat normally only models that are in btb contact can attack, but a model can slay more models than it is touching, as it's assumed that the model steps forward to get in range of other targets. Obviously there is no btb contact with Blade Wind, and all models in the unit can potentially be hit at least once. Can we therefore assume that we can view all models in the unit as potentially counting as being in btb contact with an enemy? If that's the case, then both crew and war machine ought to be fair game.
Which then brings us full circle back to the issue of how to divide the attacks from the Blade Wind *Sigh*
Damn it. For a moment I kinda thought that I'd managed to wrap my head around this one.
Logically I'd say that the attacking spellcaster ought to be able to distribute the number of attacks as he or she pleases, since we are talking about close combat attacks, and the mage arguably would count as being in btb contact with both crew and machine, but on the other hand this might be a little too good.
As I opened up saying, "We'll need a FAQ on this".
-
Rhakinlanthari
- Executioner
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 12:14 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Personally I'll be playing Bladewind as "randomise like shooting" until there is an official FAQ (that is assuming this question and other difficult Qs are answered instead of the inane, obvious ones GW like to do instead).
In other words:
1. roll for number of hits
2. for each hit roll a d6: 1-4 = war machine; 5+ = crew;
3. resolve the hits against each as normal - i.e. just roll to wound on machine and roll to hit then to wound on crew.
I think this is the most sporting way of doing things. I think the spell is still good against war machines doing it this way, but not completely over-powered.
In other words:
1. roll for number of hits
2. for each hit roll a d6: 1-4 = war machine; 5+ = crew;
3. resolve the hits against each as normal - i.e. just roll to wound on machine and roll to hit then to wound on crew.
I think this is the most sporting way of doing things. I think the spell is still good against war machines doing it this way, but not completely over-powered.
I will play the spell as I think it is intended.
There is no randomization, you simply choose where to attack, like you do in close combat; the spell affects the whole unit (basically as if you were in base contact with all models of the unit), so you can attack any model inside the unit (even if it is in the center of the unit).
You can only allocate one hit to each champion/character (if you have excess hits on a unit only containing champions/characters, they are wasted (for now, I don't think this is right, but will play it like this, anyways); only when targeting a single model unit, all hits go to that model, regardless).
Bye
Thanee
There is no randomization, you simply choose where to attack, like you do in close combat; the spell affects the whole unit (basically as if you were in base contact with all models of the unit), so you can attack any model inside the unit (even if it is in the center of the unit).
You can only allocate one hit to each champion/character (if you have excess hits on a unit only containing champions/characters, they are wasted (for now, I don't think this is right, but will play it like this, anyways); only when targeting a single model unit, all hits go to that model, regardless).
Bye
Thanee
-
Dark Alliance
- Morathi's Favoured
- Posts: 9741
- Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 1:29 pm
- Location: In the paintshop
-
Dalamar
- Dragon Lord
- Posts: 9675
- Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:42 pm
- Location: Designing new breeds of Dragons
for me it's simple - you allocate hits in whichever way you like (as if all attacks were made by one model in contact with all enemy models) but are restricted to only 1 attack per character.
Warmachine crews are not characters.
Warmachine crews are not characters.
7th edition army book:
Games Played: 213
Games Won: 114 (54%)
Games Drawn: 33 (15%)
Games Lost: 66 (31%)
8th Edition army book W/D/L:
Druchii: 36/4/16
Games Played: 213
Games Won: 114 (54%)
Games Drawn: 33 (15%)
Games Lost: 66 (31%)
8th Edition army book W/D/L:
Druchii: 36/4/16
So, I see above that there is no consensual obvious conclusion that could be reached by all players (Druchii and opponents).
Sure I'd love to allocate hits as I wish. But if my usual opponent objects because of RAW, I would hate to argue against that because it has some legitimacy.
Clarification / FAQ needed.
Sure I'd love to allocate hits as I wish. But if my usual opponent objects because of RAW, I would hate to argue against that because it has some legitimacy.
Clarification / FAQ needed.
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}
Crawd wrote:The RAW says that you can allocate up to 1 hit to the champion and heroes. You don't have to randomize because it's not shooting it's close combat.
The RAW actually says "One of these attacks can be allocated against each character and champion in the unit", not "Only one" or "Up to one".
Clearly indicative that you can't normally "allocate" the attacks as you want but rather they affect the unit in its entirety, and that it has a special "targetting" rule for characters and champions - not a limit on how many can be targetted.
RAW Warriors need to learn the subtle differences in the English language. Just as on the Druchii Tactics forum there was the big debate over Potion of Strength where the RAW Warriors tried to argue that it last two turns because of the RAW "lasts until the start of the next player's turn" which they read as the owning player's next turn. However that's incorrect grammar - if it indeed did mean the owning player's next turn then it would read "the player's next turn" NOT "the next player's turn". Grammar is key.
I would argue that similarly here, because of the RAW stating that the "only" targetting that can be done is against Characters and Champions (rather than limiting the number of allocated attacks on these models) that the rest is distributed against the unit as a whole. Whilst this is not a problem for the majority of cases where the unit is made up of similar models, when it comes to mixed units (War Machines for example) it becomes at lot more interesting.
"Give a man a fire, keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life!"
W : D : L (7th Edition)
6 : 1 : 4
W : D : L (7th Edition)
6 : 1 : 4
Milney wrote:Crawd wrote:The RAW says that you can allocate up to 1 hit to the champion and heroes. You don't have to randomize because it's not shooting it's close combat.
The RAW actually says "One of these attacks can be allocated against each character and champion in the unit", not "Only one" or "Up to one".
Holy cows from Hell.. can't you get what I just said? o_O
Fine, you're talking about "learning english" I'll teach you that what I said is true.
You can jump down of a bridge, will you do it? Nope but you can. The key word is "can"
"One of these attacks can be allocated" against those. You mustn't do it, you can, therefore it's up to 1 attacks against them, because you can choose to not hit them or hit them, so it's 0-1 attacks on the Champion and Characters, which is up to one attacks against them.
And for the rest of the spell, there isn't any other limitations except that they are "Close combat" which aren't Shooting and magic missiles are randomized as "shooting". Since the Spell isn't a Magic Missile but close combat and doesn't say: "Randomize the hits as shooting" you can allocate them as "Close Combat" since it's the only things that the spell says.
Of course, you can argue with the base to base problems, that's the real problem, I agree on this but you can't assume that you have to "Randomize the hits as shooting" because it's neither shooting or a magic missiles.