PDA

View Full Version : Ways to cast animi...?



Waaargh
01-16-2010, 06:31 AM
A debate in the FT forum draw in talk of animi, and this rule was quoted:

Hordes Field Test Rules, p. 43:

An animus? point of origin is the warbeast using the animus
or the model casting it as a spell. A model that can cast as an
animus as a spell can also channel that animus. Unless noted
otherwise, animi that target a model other than the model
using the animus require line of sight to their targets. Unlike
ranged attacks, being in melee does not prevent a model from
using an animus.

Now, I know a warbeast can cast it's own animus once a turn, and the warlock gains the animus as a spell. But this rule also allow for the animus to be channeled through the owning warbeast, correct?

Hjelmen0
01-16-2010, 06:36 AM
No, it does not. The line you're talking about just allows for a warlock to channel an animus, if they have a model with an arc node or similar ability to channel spells. I can't quite see why you'd think that it allows to channel through the owning warbeast, since the rule mentions nothing at all about that.

Waaargh
01-16-2010, 07:03 AM
You are fast, thought about telling you I had made this thread, but no need I see ;)

The important parts here, that tells us something new which isn't said in the other places in the rulebook where animi are mentioned is these:


An animus’ point of origin is the warbeast using the animus or
the model casting it as a spell.

and


A model that can cast as an animus as a spell can also
channel that animus.

(notice there seem to be added an additional "as", which I haven't marked with italic text)

To read understand it wholly, perhaps this snippet should be included:

Hordes Field Test Rules, p. 40:

A warbeast can be forced to use its animus, or the warlock
who controls the warbeast can treat the animus as if it were
one of his own spells while the warbeast is in his control area.

Here we are told the animus count as an animus for the warbeast, but counts as a spell for the warlock.

I read up on Channeling, without finding a direct solution to the case.

Conclusion: I think you perhaps are right, but not quite certain :confused:


Edit: Changed bold text to italic for readability.

Hjelmen0
01-16-2010, 07:13 AM
Exactly. The rules tell us that the animus cast as a spell can be channelled. But nothing says that the owning warbeast (as we're calling it) can be used to channel through. Also the rules for casting an animus as a spell doesn't explicitly give the owning warbeast that ability. I think you're trying to read something out of the rules that you feel is implied. I cannot see that implication, and I'm pretty sure that it's not correct.

An official-ish word would be nice, but one of those aren't always easy to come by. *turns on the "infernal"-spot*

dhow tocor
01-16-2010, 07:14 AM
What the rule means is that a Warlock is not restricted to channelling his spell list when a beast or spell or effect allows him to channel, he can also channel the animi of his Warbeasts except for those with a RNG of Self.

For example, Kaya can channel spells and animi through Laris, and Vayl can channel spells and animi through models hit by her weapon.

thegreatblah
01-17-2010, 06:48 PM
A warlock can also cast animi with the RNG of Self on themself only.

Posted this in the other thread...


Its works the other way around, think of your Warlock as being the arcnode for a warbeasts animi. So long as the warbeast is in the Warlocks control area the warlock may channel the animi as if it were a spell, himself being the point of origin of the spell.

This is how I understood it anyway.

Wishing
01-18-2010, 01:03 AM
Yeah, all I see here is that an animus can be channeled through an arc node by a warlock just like the spells on his spell list, nothing more.

dhow tocor
01-18-2010, 03:33 AM
A warlock can also cast animi with the RNG of Self on themself only.

Posted this in the other thread...


Its works the other way around, think of your Warlock as being the arcnode for a warbeasts animi. So long as the warbeast is in the Warlocks control area the warlock may channel the animi as if it were a spell, himself being the point of origin of the spell.

This is how I understood it anyway.

Except that is not what the OP is after; he knows the Warlock can cast Animi as spells. He wants to know if any Warlock can channel an Animus through the Warbeast that owns the Animus. Which the rule he is quoting is not about.

Teleologica
01-18-2010, 11:47 AM
FT Rules p43 "Spells and Animi"

"A model with the Battlegroup Commander and Fury Manipulation abilities can ... cast [an animus] as if it were a spell of its own. A warbeast must be forced to use its animus. When a warbeast uses its animus, it is not considered to be casting a spell, but when the warbeast?s controller taps its animus, the controller is considered to be casting a spell."

Then: "A model that can cast as an animus as a spell can also channel that animus."

P46 FT rules - Channeling. I Summarise (:)) - the Channeler is the one which Channels. i.e. the spell caster (presumably meaning the Warlock) casts the spell through the other model, which Channels it.

This confuses me, though admittedly that is easily done.

Maybe this is just sloppy wording, or we're over-analysing it, but it seems to me that:
1. A Warlock can cast the animus, but a warbeast does not.
2. An animus can therefore be channeled by a warlock, but NOT by the warbeast, as it cannot cast the animus as a spell.
3. Therefore, how in buggery can anything which can cast the animus as a spell also channel it?

Possible interpretations are:

1. The warbeast can be used to channel its own animus when the warlock casts it.
2. The warbeast can be forced to use the animus and channel it through the warlock.
3. The animus is simply treated as any other spell on the warlock's card if that animus is on a warbeast which can be used to channel one of the 'lock's other spells.

3 seems to me most likely to have been the intent. However, on my reading of the sections on channeling, that's not actually what the rules say. Here's hoping that the simple explanation is just that PP meant 'Channel' to mean both the casting model and the model being channeled through.

Hjelmen0
01-18-2010, 11:51 AM
I really cannot see where you see either interpretation number one or two, but I guess thats the definition of interpretation.

But 3 is the correct one, of that I'm sure.

Weaselcreature
01-18-2010, 11:53 AM
Its works the other way around, think of your Warlock as being the arcnode for a warbeasts animi. So long as the warbeast is in the Warlocks control area the warlock may channel the animi as if it were a spell, himself being the point of origin of the spell.

This is how I understood it anyway.
This is misleading. When a 'lock or 'caster channels a spell, they spend the focus for it. If you think the 'lock as being the arcnode, that would imply the 'beast pays the fury cost, which is not the case. The 'lock casts the animus as he would a spell.

To the OP, if the 'lock has a creature/ability that allows him/her to channel a spell, he/she may also channel an animus gained from one of his/her 'beasts.

TheUnknownMercenary
01-18-2010, 12:11 PM
The only Hordes models that can channel spells throuhg other models are:
Epic Kaya, who channels spells through Laris.
Vayl, who can channel spells though models affected by Spellbound, which requires models to be hit by an attack from the Oraculus.
And last are Saeyrn and Rhyas who can channel spells through each other.
In order for a warlock to be able to channel a spell through a model. The model or the warlock has to have the ability to channel in someway.

Any of these warlocks can cast a warbeast's animus (as a spell) though the channel model.

Waaargh
01-18-2010, 12:22 PM
I've calmed down, and are not worked up over it anymore :)

All is well.




...for now.

vintersbastard
01-18-2010, 04:38 PM
Sadly, the term "to channel" now refers to the caster of the spell, allthough he is not the Channeler.
This is somewhat confusing grammatically, but apparently clear from a rules point of view.

Teleologica
01-19-2010, 12:25 PM
Not exactly, and that's what is confusing me. In the Hordes FT rules it refers to the Channeler (i.e. the 'beast) which channels the spell.

Admittedly in the WM final pdf rules (don't have the book yet, not sure if it's the same - I get my copy next week :)) it refers to both the arc node model AND the warcaster as channeling. Assuming we interpret Hordes according to the wording in the WM book then it's ok, but I'm not sure that's exactly a definitive rules answer... :confused:

This is why, in my view, this particular issue is still a live one - because saying that a model which can cast the animus as a spell can channel it does not mean one clear thing in the current wording of the Hordes rules.

@ Hjelmen0 - that's why I suggested options 1+2. Not because I'm 'interpreting' the rules, but beacuse that's what the rules actually say. I think.

FWIW I completely agree with you as to what I think PP meant. i.e. any animus which a 'lock can cast is treated as being a spell on his/her card for the purposes of channeling. Personally I also think that it's unnecessary to have stated this, but there you go. Too much explanation is normally better than too little.. ;)