PDA

View Full Version : Spellcasting into melee and new all or nothing formation rule.



HellecticMojo
05-10-2014, 11:08 PM
How does casting into melee work now if I miss and offensive model/unit spell which then bounces toward my not-100%-in-formation troops?

If IFP and banethrall unit with a member that is out of formation is present and in melee with each other and I cast parasite into it, I miss against the IFP, and the banes are the next in line to be hit, do I never hit my own guys because it's a friendly effect?

ScottMcd
05-10-2014, 11:31 PM
They aren't a legal target and you would check to see if there was another legal target.

TimberWolf
05-11-2014, 04:08 AM
The errata only mentions targeting units, so if its an offensive spell that only targets a single model then the Banes will be a valid target. So it would depend on the spell being cast

Leonard_Dukes
05-11-2014, 05:27 AM
The errata only affects spells/abilities which specifically mention "friendly unit" as the thing to target/choose.

If you purposefully, or as the result of a missed roll, target a friendly unit with an offensive spell, the formation restriction does not apply.

vintersbastard
05-11-2014, 06:31 AM
The errata only affects spells/abilities which specifically mention "friendly unit" as the thing to target/choose.
No, it doesn't - it specifies spells that allow the targeting of friendly units, which includes offensive spells without a target enemy unit descriptor (as long as they target a unit, not just a model).

Since this is not a target restriction of the spell itself, the unit would not be a legal target for missing into melee, so wouldn't even be considered in case of randomization.

Mod_Neldar
05-11-2014, 06:43 AM
When a model’s special rule or spell allows its controller to choose or target a friendly unit, all models in that unit must be in formation.

It makes no statements about not applying to offensive spells that target your models.

Leonard_Dukes
05-11-2014, 09:34 AM
When an offensive spell targetting a model in melee misses, ignore its targetting restrictions when determining which model in the combat might be hit instead. If the new target is an invalid one for the spell, the spell has no further effect.

You could still end up choosing the friendly unit as the new target, but as mentioned above, a friendly unit that is not entirely in formation would (apparently) be an invalid target, and the spell would have no effect.

vintersbastard
05-11-2014, 10:02 AM
You could still end up choosing the friendly unit as the new target, but as mentioned above, a friendly unit that is not entirely in formation would (apparently) be an invalid target, and the spell would have no effect.
That rule applies only on targeting restriction of the spell itself - all other targeting restrictions (like the one on unit formation) stay in effect as normal.

juckto
05-11-2014, 12:11 PM
What are you trying to say, Vinters? That if the spell bounces onto a different unit, I only check the targeting restrictions listed on the spell card and ignore all other rules regarding spell targeting?

By that logic, a spell that bounces onto a spell-warded unit would be applied.

vintersbastard
05-11-2014, 12:25 PM
What are you trying to say, Vinters? That if the spell bounces onto a different unit, I only check the targeting restrictions listed on the spell card and ignore all other rules regarding spell targeting?

By that logic, a spell that bounces onto a spell-warded unit would be applied.You ignore the targeting restriction listed on the spell card (as per the target in melee rules for spells, p. 78 of Prime) when picking a new target (the spell would just fizzle on an invalid target).

You do not ignore targeting restrictions from something else (like Spell Ward), those prevent picking in the first place (somewhat relevant when randomizing between models).

solkan
05-11-2014, 03:59 PM
Good lord, that's a confusing way to write that, vinterbastard. :p

To try to be clearer about it, in Spell Targeting there are two different types of reasons for why a model can't be targeted by a spell:
1. The targeting restrictions, if any, specified in the spell itself. These are those phrases like "Target enemy warcaster" or "target friendly warbeast."
2. Everything else--including the new errata statement, the various spells and effects that prevent targeting by spells, the line of sight rules, etc.

The words targeting restrictions only mean, in the context of the rules, that first category. Randomization for missing only ignores the first category (the targeting restrictions) and doesn't ignore anything else.

juckto
05-11-2014, 04:14 PM
Right ... so if the spell bounces to category 2 onto a spell warded model, it fizzles.
If the spell bounces to category 2 onto an out-of-formation model, it fizzles.

solkan
05-11-2014, 06:34 PM
Right ... so if the spell bounces to category 2 onto a spell warded model, it fizzles.
If the spell bounces to category 2 onto an out-of-formation model, it fizzles.

If the spell bounces to category one model (targeting restriction), it fizzles. The spell cannot bounce onto a category two model. Because those models aren't eligible to be in the pool of targets to randomize. The spell won't bounce to those models.

Because the spell rules say:


Many spells can be cast only on certain types of models, such as warjacks or enemy troopers. Such restrictions are noted in a spell's description. To abbreviate these targeting restrictions, when a spell's description mentions an effect against a "target something," the spell can be cast only on that type of model.

When an offensive spell targeting a model in melee misses, ignore its targeting restrictions when determining which model in combat might be hit instead. If the new target is an invalid one for the spell, the spell has no further effect. (Se "Targeting a Model in Melee" on p. 58 and "Offensive Spells and Magic Attacks" above for details on resolving a magic attack against a model in melee. An AOE spell that misses will deviate normally instead.

That first paragraph is what defines the spell's "targeting restrictions", and it's those specific embedded targeting restrictions. But that doesn't invalidate the regular exclusions from page 58:

However, a model cannot become the new target if a special rule or effect prohibits it from being targeted by the attack or if the attacker's line of sight is completely blocked by obstructing terrain.

So 'category two' (the page 58 restrictions) prohibited models are never in the potential target pool. The only normally-prohibited models would be the 'category one' (page 78 targeting restriction) models.

Edit: For good measure, edited in the other paragraph...

yshsalas
05-11-2014, 06:58 PM
Getting back to the OP: Based on the original scenario....

1. Your bane thrall unit has a bane out of formation.

2. You cast parasite which targets model/unit at an IFP man in melee with said bane thrall unit.

3. It misses.

4a. You reroll the attack against any model in melee with the original target (your banes), and any model in melee with them (other IFP).
4b. For this you ignore the "model/unit" targeting restriction of the spell.
4c. BUT you remove from that pool any model who has a rule or effect that makes them untargetable by the spell, (all your banes because one if OOF).

5.Basically, this errata gives you two chances to hit the IFP, and no chance to hit your banes.

Prime 58 and 78 for reference.

Graphic uses Bane Knights to illustrate the ridiculousness further. All Yellows are eligible targets. Blues would be if not for a bane out of formation and the new errata.
https://privateerpressforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=23878&d=1399864777

jdeckert
05-11-2014, 07:11 PM
4c. BUT you remove from that pool any model who has a rule or effect that makes them untargetable by the spell, (all your banes because one if OOF).

I think you laid the steps out very clearly, thanks. I'm not sure about this part, though. The new errata states:
"When a model’s special rule or spell allows its controller to
choose or target a friendly unit, all models in that unit must be
in formation."

Parasite is not a spell that allows its controller to target a friendly unit, so the out of formation part of the new errata may not apply. Being in melee allows it to target a friendly unit, but I'm not sure that's the same thing.

yshsalas
05-11-2014, 07:24 PM
I think you laid the steps out very clearly, thanks. I'm not sure about this part, though. The new errata states:
"When a model’s special rule or spell allows its controller to
choose or target a friendly unit, all models in that unit must be
in formation."

Parasite is not a spell that allows its controller to target a friendly unit, so the out of formation part of the new errata may not apply. Being in melee allows it to target a friendly unit, but I'm not sure that's the same thing.

But Parasite IS a spell that is allowed to target a friendly unit. The only targeting restriction written in the spell is "target model/unit". There has never been anything preventing you from targeting friendly models with Offensive spells, you just cannot target the point of origin.

jdeckert
05-11-2014, 07:50 PM
But Parasite IS a spell that is allowed to target a friendly unit. The only targeting restriction written in the spell is "target model/unit". There has never been anything preventing you from targeting friendly models with Offensive spells, you just cannot target the point of origin.

You are 100% correct, my mistake. Thought parasite had "enemy" restriction in there, which is does not.

Cannotcope
05-11-2014, 11:36 PM
I would put money on the new errata being fixed to state:
"When a model’s special rule or non-offensive spell allows its controller to
choose or target a friendly unit, all models in that unit must be
in formation."

Bold being my addition to current wording.

Weaselcreature
05-13-2014, 06:59 AM
"When a model’s special rule or spell allows its controller to
choose or target a friendly unit, all models in that unit must be
in formation."

Hrmmm...semantically speaking, would missing with the spell be "allowing" the controller to "choose" a friendly target or forcing him to roll for a random target, one of which could be friendly.

Sabaoth
05-13-2014, 08:33 AM
Doesn't this kind of answer it?

https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?191130-Target-in-melee-Missed-Upkeep-spell&p=2505381&viewfull=1#post2505381

You'll still randomize including the invalid model, but if the invalid model is picked, the spell just stops. Or am I misunderstanding the question?

Leonard_Dukes
05-13-2014, 09:32 AM
Doesn't this kind of answer it?

https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?191130-Target-in-melee-Missed-Upkeep-spell&p=2505381&viewfull=1#post2505381

You'll still randomize including the invalid model, but if the invalid model is picked, the spell just stops. Or am I misunderstanding the question?

I asked this in another thread, and received this insightful explanation:

When determining the pool of possible targets on a missed magic attack or spell, ignore targeting restrictions that are on the ability or spell itself - that is, restrictions in the actual text. Things like "enemy warbeast" or "enemy warrior model", for example. Then, if an invalid target is selected, the ability/spell "fizzles" and has no effect.

Restrictions imposed on targeting by text other than the ability/spell itself are not ignored when determining the pool of possible targets, though.

So, say I try to hit an enemy warbeast with Bad Blood (target enemy warbeast), and I miss.

If the other models involved in that combat are a friendly warbeast, a friendly grunt, and an enemy grunt with Spell Ward, then I ignore the enemy grunt with Spell Ward, as that ability renders it an invalid target. I then roll against either the friendly warbeast or the friendly grunt, as only the spell text restricts them from being targeted. If I succeed in hitting them with the spell, then it does nothing.

vintersbastard
05-13-2014, 09:36 AM
Doesn't this kind of answer it?

https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?191130-Target-in-melee-Missed-Upkeep-spell&p=2505381&viewfull=1#post2505381

You'll still randomize including the invalid model, but if the invalid model is picked, the spell just stops. Or am I misunderstanding the question?
That thread was about targeting restrictions of the spell itself - and none of us is debating how those work. The issue at hand are general targeting limitations (e.g. Spell Ward, but also LOS) of the target model, which do not fall under that ruling.

Macallan
05-28-2014, 02:20 PM
How does casting into melee work now if I miss and offensive model/unit spell which then bounces toward my not-100%-in-formation troops?

If IFP and banethrall unit with a member that is out of formation is present and in melee with each other and I cast parasite into it, I miss against the IFP, and the banes are the next in line to be hit, do I never hit my own guys because it's a friendly effect?
Parasite is not a spell wich says "target friendly model/unit" so the erratum on formation is not about this spell.

If there are any other unanswered questions in this thread please start a new one.