8th Ed. lord kroak vs Vampire counts

[lizardmek]

OK I'm planning on using lord kroak in my next game Vs a vampire counts army. and a rule question has come up ...with the spell The Deliverance of Itza it says its a DIRECT DAMAGE spell that targets all enemy units within 12" ..each unit suffers 2D6 (3D6 if undead or daemonic )


My question is does this override the only target in front arch rule .....also would this still target enemy units in close combat ??


If it Doesn't override the front arch rule does use the mages front or the skink priest has Channeling the spell though



is it still lord kroak still worth taking

 

[rychek]

I would say it does exactly as the Army book description says. BRB says front arch, Army book says all within a certain, variable (oxymonron?) range. Army book trumps BRB in this conflict.

 

[n810]

Same as the Engine Of the Gods.

 

[OmegaHavoc]

It's a 12" bubble around either Kroak or the Skink Priest he's channeling the spell through

 

[eppe]

It's a 12" bubble around either Kroak or the Skink Priest he's channeling the spell through

This. I'm playing a game against my VC buddy this weekend and I'm running a "standard" list. I'm gonna try out Kroak after we get one or two games in with a normal Slann. Kroak plus suicide Skink Priests seems really fun though.

 

[hardyworld]

I believe this is a legitimate question. The armybook says it targets all enemy units in a given range, but the BRB states what qualifies as a target (units within the forward arc & not engaged in close combat). Neither exception to these rules are stated in the armybook. Honestly, given how it is currently worded, I'd say that it would only affect units in the forward arc that are not engaged in close combat. The same applies to Burning Alignment on the Engine of the Gods. I'm surprised so many people believe the contrary given the rules as written.

 

[n810]

Prety sure Every enemy unit within x" overrides the BRB's only units in front arc restriction.

 

[hardyworld]

I'll admit, I posted based on my foggy memory.

I don't have the book on me (currently procrastinating at work), but I thought the wording of the spell was that it "targets all enemy units within..." and is classified as a Direct Damage spell. The BRB defines what counts as an eligible target for all the spell classifications, which is where my thoughts were from.

If the wording is as you state is n810, then you have a good argument against the frontal arc AND into close combat restrictions since the spell wouldn't 'target' any unit and only affects units in a given range....similar to Comet of Casandora. Although if the spell doesn't target anything, why is it classified as Direct Damage? Are Magic Resistance saves only applicable to certain classifications of spells?

 

[datalink7]

The exact wording is "The Deliverance of Itza is a direct damage spell that targets all enemy units within 12".

I think there is a question here as to what exactly they meant. Because they specifically note that it is a "direct damage spell", does this mean that it targets all enemy units within 12" that can be legitimately targeted by a direct damage spell (front arc, not in combat, etc.)?

 

[Choombatta]

The spell itself defines the targeting rules. It targets all enemy units within 12".
It is classified as Direct Damage, because it needs to be defined as a type of spell, and it is the only type that fits.
It is not a Magic Missile. It is not a Hex nor Augment. It is not a Magical Vortex.

 

[Rettile]

i think we need a FAQ. Soon.

 

[datalink7]

The spell itself defines the targeting rules. It targets all enemy units within 12".
It is classified as Direct Damage, because it needs to be defined as a type of spell, and it is the only type that fits.
It is not a Magic Missile. It is not a Hex nor Augment. It is not a Magical Vortex.

I totally understand what you are staying, and I anticipate the FAQ ruling that way, but it's not 100 percent clear cut.

Targets all enemies within 12" can still mean it targets all legal enemies that a direct damage spell can target within 12".

 

[hardyworld]

i think we need a FAQ. Soon.

Agreed. But the HE are still waiting for theirs and their book is over 3 months old....so I'm not holding my breath for the LM FAQ.

The exact wording is "The Deliverance of Itza is a direct damage spell that targets all enemy units within 12".

HA! My memory wasn't off on the wording! With the current wording it's a very gray area, but RAW would lean toward that 'frontal arc' and 'not into close combat' restrictions would apply (same with Burning Alignment). The targeting rules in the BRB are clear that any exceptions to the basic targeting rules would have to be specifically stated (either in spell type description or the spell's description); the LM book does not call out these exceptions. The LM book doesn't say it can target into close combat, therefore it cannot. The LM doesn't say it can target beyond the frontal arc, therefore it cannot.

It is classified as Direct Damage, because it needs to be defined as a type of spell, and it is the only type that fits.

I disagree. Comet of Casandora doesn't have a spell type and it bypasses standard targeting rules because it doesn't target any units (it 'strikes' them). The two spells at hand here, Deliverance of Itza and Burning Alignment, both are classified as Direct Damage and both target units as one.

I really hope an FAQ comes out that states both exceptions (may target units outside frontal arc and may target units in close combat) because that may have been the RAI.


EDIT: Sorry, I applied a quote to the wrong person! My bad, I fixed it!

 

[Choombatta]

The exact wording is "The Deliverance of Itza is a direct damage spell that targets all enemy units within 12".

That is not my quote!

As for Comet, it does have a target. The spell description says to "Target a fixed point on the table". Since it does not target any unit,character,model, ect. it is one of the only spells that does not need a "type".