PDA

View Full Version : "Model loses its animus" vs other model's "Can use another model's animus as its own"



Leonard_Dukes
10-07-2015, 08:47 PM
There are a few abilities/effects in the game that cause a warbeast to "lose its animus" (e.g. Unminding, Runebreaker).

Meanwhile, some models have a rule/ability that allow them to use another model's animus either as their own or as a spell (e.g. Primal Magic, Spirit Tap, etc.)

As a general rule, can a model that can use another model's animus use the animus of a model who has "lost" it?

Or, put another way, is the phrase "this model loses its animus" simply equivalent to "this model cannot use its own animus"?

Example: Doomshaper3 casts Unminding on an enemy Shredder.

1. Can a Nephlim Bloodseer use Primal Magic to cast Tenacity as its own animus?

2. Can a Succubus use Spirit Tap to cast Tenacity as a spell?

3. Can the Shredder's battlegroup controller cast Tenacity as a spell?

solkan
10-07-2015, 09:26 PM
If the model loses its animus, it doesn't have it for the duration. So another model wouldn't be able to "borrow" it to use/cast, either.

It doesn't mean "cannot use its own animus". See "Runebreaker": https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?161746-Runebreaker-question

bakaryu
10-08-2015, 02:45 AM
Solkan is correct, essentially it means for the duration of the effect the animus is no longer a part of that warbeast's card.

Cheesebeard
10-17-2015, 08:31 AM
Solkan is correct, essentially it means for the duration of the effect the animus is no longer a part of that warbeast's card.

This would be true, except for the following:

...What follows below is how it works.

It doesn't matter how the animus is lost. If, for example, Mulg has Runebreaker up and Hoarluk3 targeted a warbeast within that effect, Hoarluk3 would be able to cast the animus of the beast.

The second sentence of Unminding gives you a fake-warbeast in your control area with the exact animus that exists on the card of the warbeast that has Unminding on it.

solkan
10-17-2015, 12:13 PM
This would be true, except for the following:

Where's the relevance?

Unminding, as described, is bypassing the whole issue by creating a "fake warbeast" containing the animus. Note how DarkLegacy said he was checking on all of the "lose animus" situations, and hasn't said anything to change the normal understanding.

Mortimer
10-18-2015, 02:19 PM
I have a different question that (I think) is close enough to the original to be included here. If a model that can use another's animus loses its own animus to one of these effects, can it still cast another animus?

For example, if Unminding was cast on the Nephilim Bloodseer, would it be able to use Primal Magic to cast another beast's animus? My gut says it can, since the effect did not remove PM. However PM says "can use the animus [...] as if it were its own", and its own animus is currently 'lost'...

DarkLegacy
10-18-2015, 04:47 PM
Solkan is correct, my previous post in the other thread is still correct. A model cannot use an animus of a warbeast that is lost. Unminding breaks this rule specifically with how it is worded.

Leonard_Dukes
10-18-2015, 05:31 PM
Solkan is correct, my previous post in the other thread is still correct. A model cannot use an animus of a warbeast that is lost. Unminding breaks this rule specifically with how it is worded.

I followed up on your post in the other thread (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?239064-Hoarluk-Doomshaper3-s-Unminding-vs-Flesh-Meld&p=3305535&viewfull=1#post3305535) with no further response from you, but we can consolidate the "lost animus" discussion to this thread, if that's more appropriate (that other thread does still have a different unanswered question, though).

You say that the wording of Unminding is what allows Doomshaper3 to use the affected warbeast's animus, by treating the animus as belonging to a "fake" warbeast in its own battlegroup and control area. Specifically:


This model can cast an affected warbeast's animus as a spell as if the animus belonged to a warbeast in this model's battlegroup and in its control area.

Using, say, a Shredder as an example:

1. Does the Shredder have an animus? Yes, it's Tenacity.
2. The Shredder is now affected by Unminding. Does it have an animus? No, it has lost its animus.
3a. Unminding allows Doomshaper3 to cast the affected warbeast's animus. Does the Shredder have an animus? No, it has lost its animus.
3b. Okay, but Uminding lets Doomshaper3 to treat the affected warbeast's animus as if it belonged to a warbeast in his battlegroup and control area. But the Shredder doesn't have an animus, so what animus is being copied over onto the "fake" warbeast?

You followed up in that other thread stating that the "fake" warbeast is treated as having "the exact animus that exists on the card" which, I won't argue, is definitely still physically printed on the card.

So how is Unminding different from Spirit Tap or Primal Magic? If Unminding refers to the actual printed animus that's on the warbeast's card and grants it to a "fake" warbeast, why don't any of these other animus-sharing abilities also refer to the actual printed animus that's on the warbeast's card and grant it to their own repertoire?

DarkLegacy
10-18-2015, 05:51 PM
I have discussed this a lot with development. It is and was very clear from them that Unminding will grant the removed animus to Hoarluk3. It is different that Primal Magic or Spirit Tap. It is not the same.

Leonard_Dukes
10-18-2015, 05:53 PM
I have discussed this a lot with development. It is and was very clear from them that Unminding will grant the removed animus to Hoarluk3. It is different that Primal Magic or Spirit Tap. It is not the same.

Well, an answer is an answer. Thanks for the followup.