Can a Circle warlock lay down multiple Wild Growths from the Woldwarden's animus?

[Macallan]

While English is not my native tongue, I usually chose each word carefully in this forum.

The ADE does not move but the animus was cast on "self" therefore it counts as being on the model for stacking purpose.

I did not say that it counts as being cast on the model. I said that it counts as being on the model. The animus is on the model. It is so for stacking purpose. So for any stacking purpose; not for stacking purpose at the moment the animus is cast.

When I chime in a thread, unless I make it otherwise clear, I answer the original question. The question was:

Can a Circle warlock lay down multiple Wild Growths from the Woldwarden's animus and have all of the forest AoEs remain in play?
There's no question that a Circle warlock can cast multiple Wild Growths. The question is, if a Circle warlock say, cast Wild Growth, moved, and then cast Wild Growth again, would the first AoE template stay in play?

And the answer is:
The ADE does not move but the animus was cast on "self" therefore it counts asbeing on the model for stacking purpose.
How can this be interpretede as a "yes you can have several AOE"?
Some of you think I am answering a question that was not asked: "does it make another already in play animus expire?". This was not the original question. So my answer can't be about this question. The "it counts as stacking" is an answer to the original question. There is only one possible meaning, then. You can't have several AOE in play.

When you remove the AOE is when the animus expires.

Admitedly this sentence was may be not clear enough. It is 100% clear in my mind and there is no way to say it differently and as concisely, but ok, let's admit it was not clear enough.

A is B means that A is B and yes the reverse is true B is A.

Replace A with "when you remove the AOE" and B with "when the animus expires".
Which part is not clear now?

In my second post, "is" effectively means "equals". While it may not be clear, I clarified it in the third post. I decide that "is" means "equals" and whether you agree with it or not is not at all important because, again, I made it clear what it means for me in the third post.

[quindraco]

Admitedly this sentence was may be not clear enough. It is 100% clear in my mind and there is no way to say it differently and as concisely, but ok, let's admit it was not clear enough.

Macallan, since you're an Infernal, I think it's in everyone's best interest for your messages to be as clear as possible. You don't want to repeat yourself, and you certainly don't want to be misinterpreted. I don't mean any disrespect, I just want to offer some constructive criticism.

1) In English, A is B does not imply B is A. For example, trucks are automobiles, but automobiles are not trucks.
2) What you meant to say is, "You remove the AOE if and only if the animus expires." I admit this is not as concise, using as it does one more word than your answer, but it is unambiguous and not open to misinterpretation.

[Geekly]

This has nothing to do with math. I'm just saying that if logically A=B, then B=A is NOT a given. It's not unreasonable to ask for clarification given that explanation. I'll provide some examples.

If you fail a charge, your activation ends. If your activation ends, you fail a charge.
If a model runs during its activation, it forfeits its combat action. If a model forfeits its combat action, it runs during its activation.
If a model is slammed, it's knocked down. If a model is knocked down, it's slammed.
Dogs are animals. Animals are dogs.

Of course there will be cases where both assertions ARE true, but I'm just saying there are plenty of cases where they aren't and that as a response to the question, it wasn't satisfying.

*I saw Macallan's response after posting this. Thank you, Macallan, for taking the time to clarify.

[Walter]

Alright, so, a I think I've got this correct. The following would be a proper implementation of the rules.

pBaldur casts his forest creation upkeep next to himself, then casts the Wold Wardens animus. This gives us two forests sitting next to one another. He is then transported, either by forest walk, advancing or some other means, backwards and far away from these forests.

pKreoss then casts Purification in such a way as to catch both forests in its area of effect. The upkeep spell forest is removed because it is an upkeep within purification, but the animus-forest is not removed because it is an animus on pBaldur, who is not within the Purification area.

later on eEiryss shoots pBaldur. At this point the animus forest would be removed, because it is an animus on pBaldur.

Have I got that right?

[magi]

I... the answer to the original question is still confusing. Could Macallan use an example to clarify?

[Valander]

Ok, let me see if I can help clarify, since I know what Macallan is saying.

• When Wild Growth is cast, it is considered an animus that is on the warlock, which contributes to the limitations of how many animi can be on a model at one time.
• The AOE is placed in accordance with the rules in Wild Growth; it is not necessarily "on" the warlock.
• If something causes the animus to expire, the AOE is removed.
• If something causes the AOE to be removed, the animus expires.

And for the record, the original question was:
Can a Circle warlock lay down multiple Wild Growths from the Woldwarden's animus and have all of the forest AoEs remain in play?

The most concise answer to that question is, simply, "No."

(On a side note, I realize everyone is passionate about this game, but please refrain from resorting to arguing about grammar, logical constructs, etc., as it more often than not muddies the issue further rather than clarifying it.)

[Crate123]

I... the answer to the original question is still confusing. Could Macallan use an example to clarify?

Do you need anything further than this to answer the original question ?
"The ADE does not move but the animus was cast on "self" therefore it counts asbeing on the model for stacking purpose.
How can this be interpretede as a "yes you can have several AOE"?"

Ninja penguins...

[kaneblaise]

My problem with this is that Wild Growth does not state "Wild Growth lasts for one round". If the AOE was connected to the caster as is being suggested, then it could be worded "Center a 4" AOE on this model. The AOE is a forest. Wild Growth lasts for one round." But it doesn't. I understand it targeting "self" and thus flushing another animus off of it, but I do not understand Eiryss shooting the forest away.

The only other animus I can find that does not say "Name Of Animus lasts for one round/turn" is Primal, oddly enough. I presume that has to do with the "if another animus is placed on this model, this model still frenzies" thing.

[Macallan]

1) In English, A is B does not imply B is A. For example, trucks are automobiles, but automobiles are not trucks.
2) What you meant to say is, "You remove the AOE if and only if the animus expires." I admit this is not as concise, using as it does one more word than your answer, but it is unambiguous and not open to misinterpretation.

It works the exact same way in French.
"is" may have several meanings. In your first example, "is" does not have the modern and logical meaning of the verb "be". In your example, "is" means, in modern logic, "is part of". It has the meaning of "is" in the antic logic of Aristotle, not the modern logic. In modern logic there are two and only two basic relations. "equal" and "is part". "is" sometimes means one and some other times the other. Here I meant "equals".
Trucks are part of the automobiles set. The are not automobiles. A triangle with two sides of same length is a triangle with two angles of same measure.
The ancients said that Socrates is a human. In modern logic, we will say that he is part of the human beings. But I am sure that you know what I mean.
I am aware of both meaning ; thus I said it could be misinterpreted. However, once I clarified that it was suppose to mean that it was a "if and if only", then I don't think that any other interpretation is possible.

Geekly, none of my statements were "if...then". They are all "if and if only". I did not say "if it expires then remove the ADE", nor did I say "if you remove the AOE then it expires". I said both in one sentence.

I think that we are on the same page, now.
If there are lingering issues, please ask in a new thread and, more important, explain why you think it is not clear and why you think that two answers are possible based on what was said here.
Disagreeing with my answer and not understanding it are two separate things.

Magi, original question's answer is no multiple AOE.

edit. Logic is part of my real life work so I can't resist

[Macallan]

I want to add one additional note because I don't like the idea that I was not clear (though I can live with it).

My second post is a reply to

Now that all of the effects of Wild Growth are resolved, Wild Growth expires.

This is essentially incorrect.
So what was I going to say? I was going to say when exactly Wild Growth expires. And the reply will be a "I tell you exactly when it expires", not "I give you an example of when it expires".

If I ask you what a truck is, then "a truck is an automotive" is not going to be a clear and good answer. You will tell me exactly what a truck is. Same state of mind here. I tell you exactly when the animus expires. It is exactly when you remove the AOE.