Borrowing warscoll abilities.

[Guest]

Since two people seem keen on derailing my chaos army thread with jumble regarding borrowing spells. Here's the deal. Lots of wizards in AoS have the ability to use spells from other models' warscrolls. This creates some confusion due to the writing style of the AoS spells.

 

So, first, classic spell borrower is Kairos Fateweaver.

Full rules are here:

A quote for the section in question is here:

 

MAGIC
Kairos Fateweaver is a wizard. He can
attempt to cast two different spells in each
of your own hero phases and attempt to
unbind two spells in each enemy hero
phase. He knows the Arcane Bolt, Mystic
Shield and Gift of Change spells. Kairos
also knows the spells of all other Wizards
from your army that are within 18" of him.

Kairos isn't alone, many tzeetnch wizards have some degree of this ability, as do some non-tzeentch wizards.

 

Now, the format that AoS lists spells:

<flavor text, if any>

<then they describe the spell's casting cost>

<then the spell's effect or effects>

 

Now, if you haven't noticed, AoS writers like to alternate the name of the caster of the spell, and the wording of the spell, so each entry feels flavorful and new. This is a great way to write as a fiction writer, but it seems to annoying some of the other players online.

 

 

Another thing of note is that keywords are written in a different font in the PDFs when written in spells and other rules, to seperate them from the non-keyword uses. GW's been very clear here. The second font is all capitals, but with larger first letters for each word, which comes out as uppercase and lower case when copied and pasted below.

 

For example spell #1 I have the Great Unclean One's Plague Wind.

It is found in the Daemons Pdf

 

PLAGUE WIND
The Great Unclean One summons a
whirlwind of maggots and filth, basking in
its feculence for a moment before sending
it forth. Plague Wind has a casting value of
7. If successfully cast, pick an enemy model
within 14" and draw a straight line between
it and the caster. That unit, and every other
unit that this line passes over each suffer
D3 mortal wounds. Nurgle units are instead invigorated by the Plague Wind; if
it passes over them one model in the unit
heals D3 wounds.

Although the copy and paste version lacks the font change, the only word with the font change is the "Nurgle" word. This is because the Great Unclean one is not a Keyword here, but a flavor text alternate use of "caster." Then we have the spell's casting value clearly stated. Then the effects.

 

Example spell #2 is the Chaos Sorcerer Lord on Manticore's Wind of Chaos.

It is found in the Warriors of chaos pdf.

 

WIND OF CHAOS
The Sorcerer summons the raw power of
Chaos and sends a vortex of fell energies
screaming across the battlefield. Wind
of Chaos has a casting value of 7. If
successfully cast, pick a visible unit within
18". Roll a number of dice equal to the total
casting roll that was rolled for this spell (or
example, if Wind of Chaos was cast with
a casting roll of 8, roll 8 dice). For each
roll of 5, the target unit suffers one mortal
wound. For each roll of 6, the target unit
suffers D3 mortal wounds.

 

Again, we have the caster described by the Warscroll's name in a lovely line of flavor text. Then a casting value, then an listed effect. Not all spells include flavor text lines, but they stick to format without them (by starting with the casting value).

 

Personally, I think it is very clear that the intention is that players substitute the caster's name for the one who is borrowing the ability. Granted, this still doesn't replace keywords, but the caster's name isn't listed as a keyword.

 

Spell example #3 is an oddity from Vilitch the Curseling.

He's also in the Warriors of Chaos pdf

 

GLEAN MAGIC
Vilitch reaches into his adversary’s mind,
and steals arcane knowledge to use for
his own ends. Glean Magic has a casting
value of 3. If successfully cast, pick an
enemy Wizard within 24", choose one
of the spells from their warscroll and roll
two dice. If the result is equal to or greater
than the casting value of the chosen spell,
Vilitch learns that spell and can use it for
the rest of the battle.

Wizard is the only keyword font in this spell. This one is a bit odd, as the caster is referenced twice, both in the spell's effect and in the flavor text. I still think the intention is to reference the caster with both uses of Vilitch.

 

It is notable that nothing prevents this spell from being borrowed within the text, and if we assume that non-keywords apply as keywords, then Vilitch can potentially learn spells while not being the wizard that cast's Glean Magic.

 

Now, for another concept, we have a few models which can use other model's Command Abilities. Yeah, the skaven have one and the Dark Elves have one just like it, there are probably others.

 

For skaven, it is part of the "Skaven Chieftain with Battle Standard"

From the skaven pdf:

 

Treacherous Progression: If your general
is a Skaven and has only 1 Wound
remaining, a Skaven Chieftain with
Battle Standard can stab-stab him in the
back if he is within 1" at the start of any
hero phase. If he does so, your general is
slain and this model usurps his position;
he becomes your general and gains all
the command abilities known by his
former master.

The first use of "skaven" is in keyword font, with no other keyword font's used.

 

It is very notable that there are no "skaven" command abilities listed in that PDF that don't refer specifically to the model's whose command ability it is. The clear intention is to be able to use the command abilities as if he were that model. That said, he remains the Skaven Cheiftain with battle standard, so if we discount his ability to use borrowed command abilities, we are unable to do as his ability says.

[Threejacks]

Well cuz derailing your thread is soo much fun!

 

 

J/k:)

 

 

Im not seeing any italic`s on the GW pdf for the spell descriptions,but either way I can see from just picking several spells at random that yeah,I believe you are correct that the spell descriptions likely shouldn't be used in this case to define if the spell could be used as a stolen one or not...if it did based on using the Keyword form of each caster than most all spells couldn't be stolen and I don't think they would intend that.

 

I guess I was thinking most spells were along the lines of the ones I use when playing my OnG,,well those and the summoning ones from my Undead.

 

An example of an OnG spell "Foot of Gork"

 

"FOOT OF GORK

Foot of Gork has a casting value of 6. If

successfully cast, select a visible unit within

18"; inflict D3 mortal wounds on that unit.

Then roll a dice – on a 4 or more Gork

stomps again! Inflict another D3 mortal

wounds on that unit.

5"

6

5 6+

DESTRUCTION, ORRUK,"

 

No were in the description does it mention the Savage orc Shaman who is the owner of the spell..This to me says it could easily be used if stolen as theres not even any fluff reference what he does before or during casting it.

But I believe this to be way more in the exception arena than the rule.

 

 

The only thing I would say about stolen spells then is,if its a summoning spell then the player will need to be providing their own models to place on the table,as in summoned models need to come from the summoning players collection,not their opponents.

 

 

Stolen spells could very well be another one of those things that seems like an awesome/OTT ability and all that,but in the context of a 6 turn game it may not be all that great.More games in will tell if its a real issue or not:)

[Guest]

The only thing I would say about stolen spells then is,if its a summoning spell then the player will need to be providing their own models to place on the table,as in summoned models need to come from the summoning players collection,not their opponents.

I've consider this one. I agree, the right models would be required. That said, there are other limitations. In that format I created, most of the ways to use borrowing spells to be OP are gone. There's a few, but they are very circumstantial.

[Guest]

Well cuz derailing your thread is soo much fun!

 

 

J/k:)

And I'm usually pretty easy to derail too. I think I'm getting old, as I'm not enjoying the long debates as much as I used to.