Jump to content

Need a ruling for OFCC


Recommended Posts

On page 132, for the Truthsayer it says the following 

 

"When selecting spell, a Truthsayer can exchange one spell for the Transformation of Kadon, instead of the usual signature spell." 

 

I see one of three ways to read this, and would like a ruling please. 

 
1.  The Truthsayer can exchange a single spell for Transformation of Kadon instead of the usual Wyssans Wild Form, but it does not say you can't take a second spell and exchange it for Wyssans, essentially giving the Truthsayer two signature spells.  Both Skaven and High magic have set the precedent for this interpretation, and I think is the way the rule was intended and written.  
 
2.  You can only exchange one spell for a signature spell, but you may choose to exchange that spell for either Transformation of Kadon or Wyssans Wild form, but you can't do both.   Even though I don't agree with this interpretation, there is a strong argument for it. 
 
3.  You may not choose Wyssans Wild form at all, Transformation of Kadon becomes your only option for a signature spell.  Personally I think the argument for this ruling is weak, as it says you can exchange, which means you don't have to.
 
However it is ruled is the way I will play it, but I just want it known so I can practice it that way, thanks.
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my opinion:

 

I believe it should be number 2.  Why number 2?  Dark Elves have the option to exchange 2 spells for both signature spells.  I know we have a specific rules which allows us to; however, this one is pretty vague.

 

Raindog, you should let them get both spells.  Neither one of them is OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate my job, so it's philosophy of language time!

 

I'd vote for the wording being so ambiguous as to plausibly admit of multiple meanings.  As a philosophical matter I just don't think that it is the case that all sentences have a definitive meaning that can be determined from the text.  Some do of course, but not all.

 

Take my favorite Beatles lyric.  It's from Michelle.

"I'll say the only words I know that you'll understand."

 

Is there a set of words that he is certain she'll understand?  "I know you'll understand"

Is there a set of words that he knows, some of which she'll understand.  "I'll say the only words I know"

 

I think it's just a philosophical mistake to think one of those readings is correct and the other incorrect as an objective feature of the sentence.  One meaning was presumably intended by Paul McCartney or John Lennon, just as one meaning was meant by Games Workshop, but a) we don't know what it is and b) I'm not sure that the intent trumps the actual written word.  As support for "b" consider the following.  I say "Turn left" meaning "Turn right", I intend for you to turn right, but I just misspeak, a slip of the tongue.  The sentence "Turn left" means turn left, despite my intention for my sentence to mean something else.

 

Where does this get us in rules interpretation?

 

I think the best question isn't "which interpretation is slightly stronger than the others" and looking hard at comma placements and subtleties of word choice.  I think the best question is "Given that the rule is unclear, what interpretation generates the best games?".

 

In this case the Truthsayer is a decent, but unremarkable bargain for a level 3 or 4 wizard and has access to two lores.  

 

Losing access to Wildform takes a bite out of Beasts, it's probably the best spell in the lore.  Without it, there isn't another unit augment (there are a bunch of character augments).  

 

Given that any army can take a Truthsayer, maybe a lore of character augments and a lore of unit augments (the other lore the Truthsayer can take is Light) is a good deal.  Trading Wildform for Transformation just reinforces that dichotomy, which makes the choice between lores more interesting (IMO), so I like 3 from a gameplay standpoint.  It makes the choice between Beasts and Light more stark, one can't hedge beasts' character focus with a unit buff, it's all characters for beasts or all units for light. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my opinion:

 

I believe it should be number 2. Why number 2? Dark Elves have the option to exchange 2 spells for both signature spells. I know we have a specific rules which allows us to; however, this one is pretty vague.

 

Raindog, you should let them get both spells. Neither one of them is OP.

MN you sure of that. Last I read it I am positive it said you could only choose one of the sig spells for Dark Magic.

 

Also if it not number 3 it would just say "replace spell" instead of mentioning sig spells. That's the logic I get from this.

 

Honestly I could careless as for the ruleing becuase it doesn' look like it would be that big of a deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MN you sure of that. Last I read it I am positive it said you could only choose one of the sig spells for Dark Magic.

 

Also if it not number 3 it would just say "replace spell" instead of mentioning sig spells. That's the logic I get from this.

 

Honestly I could careless as for the ruleing becuase it doesn' look like it would be that big of a deal.

MN is right:

 

"When generating spells, a Wizard can swap a randomly generated Dark Magic spell for one of the lore's two signature spells. Wizards who know two or more spells from the Lore of Dark Magic can instead swap any two Dark Magic spells for both signature spells."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MN you sure of that. Last I read it I am positive it said you could only choose one of the sig spells for Dark Magic.

 

Also if it not number 3 it would just say "replace spell" instead of mentioning sig spells. That's the logic I get from this.

 

Honestly I could careless as for the ruleing becuase it doesn' look like it would be that big of a deal.

Yes, I'm sure,  and NtK hit the quote from the book.  Once again, this proves why every Dark Elves general should introduce themselves in the following manner:

 

"Hello, I'm [insert name], I play Dark Elves and I love to cheat."  Make sure to keep a straight face as well as a smile during your entire introduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I'm sure,  and NtK hit the quote from the book.  Once again, this proves why every Dark Elves general should introduce themselves in the following manner:

 

"Hello, I'm [insert name], I play Dark Elves and I love to cheat."  Make sure to keep a straight face as well as a smile during your entire introduction.

Wow, I've been cheating in my opponents favor. Of course I could get a name tag that says it for OFCC to make introductions shorter.

 

Need to reread Dark Magic when I get home to make sure I don't have anything else wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't cheat, we seize every advantage to further the glory of the Witch King!  Gall...

Unfortunately, if you're not a Dark Elf General, people don't respect that as an acceptable answer ;)

 

The only other race who understands our chaos would be Skaven...which is amusing to me.  We both pretty much operate the same way.

 

To put it into DnD terms:  It's a Lawful Evil ruler in a Lawful Chaotic society.

 

They should rename Triumph and Treachery to the following....Dark Elf 101, the footprint to a great ruler!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. If I roll a double I can take Wild Form, any spell in the lore right?

 

2.  Here is the interesting question, if I roll a 6 and get Transformation, and drop one of my other spells to the signature spell which is Kadon, then I essentially have a double right?  So I could then choose Wild Form could I not?  Or would I have Transformation twice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...