7th Ed. Q&A to GW [Question about Cupped Hands]

[Dreadgrass]

Another one, if your sending through any more Q&A's...

Q: Cupped Hands of the Old Ones, Does the spell that is miscast automatically fail if its casting value is passed?

A: All other items that "Ignore the affects of a miscast" state specifically that "the spell still fails"....

 

[Dalkarius]

Re: Q&A to GW

whoa....you may be on to somethin...lemme go read my book real quick and get back to this tomorrow

 

[blackhawk]

Re: Q&A to GW

Another one, if your sending through any more Q&A's...

Q: Cupped Hands of the Old Ones, Does the spell that is miscast automatically fail if its casting value is passed?

A: All other items that "Ignore the affects of a miscast" state specifically that "the spell still fails"....

double one means that the spell is not cast, in addition you get teh miscast effects. so yeah the spell is not cast anyway..

 

[Dalkarius]

Re: Q&A to GW

Hm, I'm not so sure on this one. casting a spell with two 1's is very difficult though. But in the description of the item it clearly states that the miscast is ignored but as our friend here has pointed out, no where does it state that the spell would still count as failing. While on the profile for say Lord Kroak, it very clearly states that the spell still fails automatically. Perhaps a misprint?

 

[strewart]

Re: Q&A to GW

Hmm I am inclined to say that it is still miscast, however, it is rather interesting that it says the miscast is ignored.. That seems to indicate otherwise. And even if the BRB says double 1 is always a miscast (I will check when I get home) GW have pointed out a number of times that army books overrule the BRB.

 

[SlannOfItza]

I know this topic is kinda old, but I'd love to hear everyone's conclusions!

The wording certainly does make it sound like the spell still goes off because other items and such do state the spell "still fails". Though it seems a bit overpowered if the spell still goes off, not to mention your playing really strict to the wording, where usually friendly games take a bit of logic into play.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to still cast the spell, more power to the lizards. Though with 2 ones, your probably throwing 3 dice, so your only likely to get off a 4-6+ casting value anyway...

 

[Barotok]

The reason the discussion wasn't continued was because any more would have been speculation before the FAQ for LM was released. I think that the questions here were clarified in the FAQ release.

This is also pretty well clarified in the BRB, although there is some room for argument if you look on page 108.

Note that a miscast spell does not normally succceed, regardless of the actual casting result rolled by the wizard.

I would say that the "does not normally succeed" refers to rolling 12 on the miscast table. I would also say that if an item gives you the ability have a spell go through despite a miscast, then this would also be an an exception to "does not normally succeed." However, CH doesn't say the spell succeeds.

Once again, pretty useless to discuss considering the FAQ is out.

 

[SlannOfItza]

Oh right, I didn't think to go check the FAQ...

Besides its better to play it without trying to squeeze as much cheese as possible from the wording, Lol.

 

[strewart]

Actually no this question was asked after the FAQ came out, the reason it was split out of the FAQ thread was because I considered it still relevant and a good question.

I am inclined to think that as intended, the spell fails, but there is certainly a good case for it succeeding.

 

[SlannOfItza]

I agree that the wording certainly does imply it might suceed anyway.

But like I said, i would play it that it still fails...

 

[Barotok]

True, I took a closer look at the FAQ and found that all the questions in regards to CH don't really address this. I certainly can fault the writers of the army book for not giving us a clear description of what happens, considering most other items of this nature specifically say, "The spell fails". However, I'd go one step further and say that the BRB's miscast section is very poorly written. Perhaps in the 12 result on the miscast table, they could say something like "Despite the fact that the spell fails on a miscast, this is an exception to this rule." They don't, and so we have this kind of discussion because of a loophole that is definitely valid, but isn't typically in the spirit of the rules.

Next time I'll check my FAQ before giving a complete answer. I apologize to SlannofItza specifically for this.

 

[SlannOfItza]

Oh you don't need to apologize, I should have checked the FAQ before hastily posting anyway. Makes me seem like less of a noob.

But yeah, the wording is definately terrible on the miscast rules, and the cupped hands. Isn't GW just so good at writing details? Lol.

Thanks anyway Barotok.