FAQ: Protectorate of Menoth

[Silverstar843]

Hoo boy, this is gonna be hard to answer.

1: page 244 gives the defination of simultaneous attacks, mentioning resolving all damage and effects before resolving any of the target's special rules or effects.
2: Knights Exemplar Errants self-sac ability it says "when this model is disabled, chose a friendly non-disabled model within 3"

At this point we know that all the models get disabled at the same time, and they can't sac to another model who is disabled.

3: the order of damage is roll to hit, roll to injure, mark damage. If that model loses all it's boxes, it is then disabled, then it is boxed, then it is destroyed. So things can trigger inbetween.

So, the Mangler charges and catches 6 errants in a tight formation so they are all possible self-sac targets (just bear with me). He picks one rolls to hit and rolls damage that model is disabled, then continues down the line until all those attacks are resolved. All 6 become disabled, but Rhupert gave them Tough on them the turn before and Harby is looking at that saying to herself, "I can't let ALL those die!". So NOW, the Protectorate player can chose to Martyrdom or have them make Tough rolls OR self sacrifice in any order. So model A opts to make a Tough roll he fails and is still disabled, Harby can now martyrdom OR a model can self-sac. Model B is in a key spot and Harby opts to just save him and not have him knocked down, so martys him. Model C also fails its tough roll, and can now self-sacrifice to model B.

Once they Self-sac the models are removed as part of that ability. After that, any models still disabled are boxed, then it is destroyed and finally removed from the table (not to be confused with Removed from Play).

[Northernlight]

thanks for the thread of consolidation

[Silverstar843]

welcome, glad to help : )

[ForgottenVirtue]

Choir
4: Magical Weapons make magical attacks, meaning that Passage won't protect against them. They're not spells, so Shielding won't work either. Magic attacks and Magical attacks are different terms. Magical refers to any weapon with the icon, a spell, or Magical Ability. Magic attacks are only spells or magic abilities (listed as Magical Ability [X]. See the Vassal, for example).

I think you have this bit wrong. The magical weapons rule in the rule book states "Attacks made with magical weapons are not magic attacks. Magical ranged weapons make ranged attacks. Magical melee weapons make melee attacks" Pg 68. If I missed an errata or something please let me know cause then I owe some of my friends an apology. But if I'm right then have fun making your next Retribution opponent cry! Also this should effect the High Paladin as well.

Excellent summary!

Cheers!

[PG_Menite Messenger]

I think you have this bit wrong. The magical weapons rule in the rule book states "Attacks made with magical weapons are not magic attacks. Magical ranged weapons make ranged attacks. Magical melee weapons make melee attacks" Pg 68. If I missed an errata or something please let me know cause then I owe some of my friends an apology. But if I'm right then have fun making your next Retribution opponent cry!

Dont need an errata as far as i know,

Passage (* Action) - The Warjack cannot be targeted by non magical ranged attacks. Passage last for one round

Emphasis mine. Please correct me if im wrong, i would laugh so hard, but im pretty sure you need to start appologising to people.

MM

[Charming]

I believe ForgottenVirtue means that the cited paragraph says that magical ranged weapons make ranged attacks, and that they thus would be mudane. Something like "Magical ranged weapons make magical ranged attacks" would be needed. In one way I think you're right FV, but still it would make our jacks immune to everything ranged except for stuff from magical abilities (of which I know none, I think everything like that is magic ability like the Vassal's Arcane bolt).

[PG_Menite Messenger]

I believe ForgottenVirtue means that the cited paragraph says that magical ranged weapons make ranged attacks, and that they thus would be mudane. Something like "Magical ranged weapons make magical ranged attacks" would be needed.

Would that not then mean that there is no difference at all between a magic ranged weapon and a normal ranged weapon, there would be no need for magical weapons at all if that were the case, doesnt add up. I believe the rule he is quoting from Prime is there to show that while a magic ranged weapon attack is magical, it is not a spell, and still classes as a ranged attack.

Are you proposing that an attack from a Magical ranged weapon has no magical element? If it has a magical element, above choir rule negates it.

Again im open to suggestion, would love to be proved wrong

EDIT - Link to a rules forum post backing up the views expressed here (a bit of Search Fu brings up a whole lot of responces covering this topic)

http://privateerpressforums.com/show...magical+attack

http://privateerpressforums.com/show...magical+attack

http://privateerpressforums.com/show...magical+attack

MM

[Charming]

Would that not then mean that there is no difference at all between a magic ranged weapon and a normal ranged weapon, there would be no need for magical weapons at all if that were the case, doesnt add up. I believe the rule he is quoting from Prime is there to show that while a magic ranged weapon attack is magical, it is not a spell, and still classes as a ranged attack.

Are you proposing that an attack from a Magical ranged weapon has no magical element? If it has a magical element, above choir rule negates it.

Again im open to suggestion, would love to be proved wrong

MM

Yes that is the point I think FV is making, that Passage should protect the 'jacks from both magical and mudane ranged weapons, as they both make ranged attacks. I'm pretty damn sure magical weapons make magical attacks though, otherwise the only thing they were good for would be to hit Incorporeal models, since that is the only thing explicitly stated in the rulebook.

[PG_Menite Messenger]

Yes that is the point I think FV is making, that Passage should protect the 'jacks from both magical and mudane ranged weapons, as they both make ranged attacks.

But that is in direct opposition to the Passage Rule

Passage (* Action) - The Warjack cannot be targeted by non magical ranged attacks. Passage last for one round

They are all ranged attacks, but one is a "normal" ranged attack, and therefore gets nerfed by Passage, and th other is a Magical Ranged Attack, and therefor bypasses passage becasue passage ONLY blocks "non magical ranged attacks"

The rules posts i linked to above explain better than i do

MM

[Charming]

Passage (* Action) - The Warjack cannot be targeted by non magical ranged attacks. Passage last for one round

The point of FVs post is that the magical weapon ruling says that "magical ranged weapons make ranged attacks" making it not 100% obvious that those are magical ranged attacks.

[PG_Menite Messenger]

The point of FVs post is that the magical weapon ruling says that "magical ranged weapons make ranged attacks" making it not 100% obvious that those are magical ranged attacks.

If they were NOT magical ranged attacks, then magical ranged attacks would not exist, and therefore the wording of the chior rule would be completly superflous.

Id say its pretty clear, and the issue your saying here i addressed in my 2nd post, that the wording is to ensure that the player is aware that the attack is STILL ranged (but magical because its forma magical weapon) rather than for example a Magic attack, which is completly different.

The rules forum posts i linked pretty much all agree. Its after 1am here so im gunna stop this circular argument and someone else can pick it up some time.

EDIT - Im gunna link it again because it deals with exactly what your talking about. http://privateerpressforums.com/show...magical+attack

MM

[ForgottenVirtue]

OK that makes sense, there are differences with the rules that go with magic attacks to those that go with ranged attacks and the passage is just stating that it must still follow all the criteria for a ranged attack.

Thank you for the clarification and sorry it kept you up so late.

[Silverstar843]

NP, most of the stuff on here has been argued to death already, and that's why I made it ^^

[Frenchit]

A question on Revengers...
After being bumped back from the Revenger's shield, does the enemy model suffer a free strike from exiting the Revenger's melee range?
Does this happen only during my own activation or during the enemy turn as well?

[drachenfels]

A question on Revengers...
After being bumped back from the Revenger's shield, does the enemy model suffer a free strike from exiting the Revenger's melee range?
Does this happen only during my own activation or during the enemy turn as well?

no it doesnt trigger a freestrike because it is not an advance.

[Frenchit]

no it doesnt trigger a freestrike because it is not an advance.

Can you show me where it says it needs to "advance" out of range to suffer a free strike?
According to the quick rules, it says...

"Free Strike: A model can make a free attack with any melee weapon against an opponent that moves out of melee range. It gets a +2 bonus to the attack roll and the damage roll is automatically boosted."

It just says "move", so unless its splitting hairs or says something differently in the actual rule book, I don't see why being repulsed wouldn't garner a free strike.

[GarrattJ]

Can you show me where it says it needs to "advance" out of range to suffer a free strike?
According to the quick rules, it says...

"Free Strike: A model can make a free attack with any melee weapon against an opponent that moves out of melee range. It gets a +2 bonus to the attack roll and the damage roll is automatically boosted."

It just says "move", so unless its splitting hairs or says something differently in the actual rule book, I don't see why being repulsed wouldn't garner a free strike.

While your reading of the rule is correct. The Revenger's shield "pushes" the target model, and a model that is pushed (pg 52 MRB) does not suffer free-strikes during a push. And I believe free-strikes are only awarded on models "advancing" out of melee range.

[Frenchit]

While your reading of the rule is correct. The Revenger's shield "pushes" the target model, and a model that is pushed (pg 52 MRB) does not suffer free-strikes during a push. And I believe free-strikes are only awarded on models "advancing" out of melee range.

Thank you very much for clearing that up for me!

[Blackraine]

Errants - Sacrificial Bond (I think? Don't have my cards with me) becomes the source of the sacrificed model's destruction when used. Thus, if a Berserk model attacks your errant, and you use Sacrificial Bond to change the destruction to a different model, the Berserk model does not get an additional attack, because he did not kill the Errant... Sacrificial Bond did. This also applies to certain soul tokens, snacking, and many other things that models get for destroying enemy models.

Bastions - Same as above, except this now also includes damage, and thus widens the effective scope to things that trigger off of damaging enemy models (like Spirit Fang).

[Silverstar843]

Errants - Sacrificial Bond (I think? Don't have my cards with me) becomes the source of the sacrificed model's destruction when used. Thus, if a Berserk model attacks your errant, and you use Sacrificial Bond to change the destruction to a different model, the Berserk model does not get an additional attack, because he did not kill the Errant... Sacrificial Bond did. This also applies to certain soul tokens, snacking, and many other things that models get for destroying enemy models.

Bastions - Same as above, except this now also includes damage, and thus widens the effective scope to things that trigger off of damaging enemy models (like Spirit Fang).

Kinda surprised I didn't have this in there before. Updated.

[Pixl]

"Knights Exemplar Vengers
1: Stopping to make impact attacks is optional. This means that Vengers under the Testament's feat can charge through things."

Not true.
pg.62, main rulebook:
"If a charging cavalry model contacts another model during its movment and has moved at least 3", it stops and make impact attacks."

Nothing there about MAY stop or CAN stop, it says it stops so you do. It is not optional if you move at least 3". Unless I am missing another
rule for this somewhere.

[DarkLegacy]

"Knights Exemplar Vengers
1: Stopping to make impact attacks is optional. This means that Vengers under the Testament's feat can charge through things."

Not true.
pg.62, main rulebook:
"If a charging cavalry model contacts another model during its movment and has moved at least 3", it stops and make impact attacks."

Nothing there about MAY stop or CAN stop, it says it stops so you do. It is not optional if you move at least 3". Unless I am missing another
rule for this somewhere.

The errata changed it.
http://privateerpressforums.com/show...Impact-attacks

[Pixl]

Cool, then that is what I missed. Thanks.

*downloads errata*

[Never]

3: With the Exception of Battle, all of the hymns last until the start of your next turn. Battle will not affect free strikes. The Hymn cannot be overwritten, meaning use Battle, activate the jack, then use one of the protective hymns after.

That's not the way Battle works is it? Battle states that it lasts until the end of the player's turn (rather than the next round). As a 'jack can only have one hymn and it can't expire before at least the end of the turn there's on way to get one of the protective hymns on it after it's activated. Or have it missed something?

[stormshaft]

That's not the way Battle works is it? Battle states that it lasts until the end of the player's turn (rather than the next round). As a 'jack can only have one hymn and it can't expire before at least the end of the turn there's on way to get one of the protective hymns on it after it's activated. Or have it missed something?

Correct, I suppose you just misread Silverstars post, his example at the end explains what you cannot do.

So only one hymn per 'jack.

[TrilliumLT]

#1 Harbinger's Cataclysm auto hits enemy model. Targeting stealth models outside of the 5" always misses. Which one is it?

#2 Cataclysm can I target a friendly model? I just have to roll to hit?

#3 Martyrdom - I heal a disabled model for 1, is it knocked down or is that just a model that passes a tough roll?

Im sure these have been cover before.

[Silverstar843]

1: on page 61, it states auto-hit trumps auto-miss, so her ability automatically hits the target.

2: Nope, the spell requires an enemy as a target.

3: The martyred model remains standing and heals 1 point, so it is no longer disabled, but Harbinger takes d3 damage for using it. Tough models are knocked down as a result of rolling the 5 or 6. If you are using Rhupert, you can choose to roll Tough or use Martyrdom first, but if the model makes its Tough roll and something else kills it, it will still be on the ground if you Martyr it.

[TrilliumLT]

Found the Infernal ruling to my second question here http://privateerpressforums.com/show...clysm+friendly

[Sweet Bear Meat]

Just want to make sure I've been playing this right:

If an attack is an AOE that is type Fire , but the target hit is immune to blast damage, does it take any damage?

What about where the model is immune to fire damage?

[PG_KestrelM1]

If an attack is an AOE that is type Fire , but the target hit is immune to blast damage, does it take any damage?

What about where the model is immune to fire damage?

If the model hit has immunity to blast damage, it will not suffer a blast damage roll, regardless of the type. However, if the attack also causes Continuous Fire, the model hit will suffer that effect.

If the model hit has immunity to Fire, it will not take any damage from a Fire-type attack, whether it is blast damage or not. If the attack also causes Continuous Fire, it will not suffer Continuous Fire either.

Hope that helps.

[Sweet Bear Meat]

Good. That's how I've been playing it.

Thank You

[Kaneas]

a question
amon synergi affect every model in the BG that is in the CTRL AOE...so affect units, jack and solos, right?

[DarkLegacy]

a question
amon synergi affect every model in the BG that is in the CTRL AOE...so affect units, jack and solos, right?

Only models in the battlegroup are affected by Synergy.

[Kaneas]

only caster, jacks and caster attachment, right? Thnx

[Silverstar843]

nope, only the caster and their jacks.

[JacobtheAussie]

only caster, jacks and caster attachment, right? Thnx

The point being that a Warcaster Attachment is not a part of the battlegroup

[Kaneas]

what u think about pFeora guys?

[Silverstar843]

not for the FAQ, Kaneas. This is for rules related questions, please. Try making a thread or check the Cannon of the True Law article : )

[Kaneas]

not for the FAQ, Kaneas. This is for rules related questions, please. Try making a thread or check the Cannon of the True Law article : )

k no problem. srry