ya the page with the rules and not summary aren't leaked. Although the discussion on khaine magic on the tomb kings forum has an image of that page
Najo's Review of End Times Magic
- Thread starter najo
- Start date
-
The masquerade of murder returns! A new game of Vampires Amongst Us has begun. Unmask the killers, trust no one, and try to survive the night. Find out more and sign up now!
Infernal Skull
Wight King
Just did some digging. It seems that every single page of rules is up online except the 2nd half of the spread that has the ET magic rules. (They seriously couldn't be bothered to photograph one more page?)
Spiky Bits did a "flip through the book" review and turned directly from the chapter 1 page to the Magical Lodestones page, skipping over the End Times Magic rules spread without even acknowledging it!
Anyway, there's a "Magical Lodestone" page that I haven't seen pop up in here. It makes every Mystical Monument a lodestone and there's a new summoning spell that lets Wizards summon Arcane Fulcrums. Both Arcane Fulcrums and Lodestones give nearby wizards +2 to their channeling rolls. Here's the link:
http://www.fanhammer.org/khaine-progress-of-spells-and-magic-items-Book/?lang=en
Spiky Bits did a "flip through the book" review and turned directly from the chapter 1 page to the Magical Lodestones page, skipping over the End Times Magic rules spread without even acknowledging it!
Anyway, there's a "Magical Lodestone" page that I haven't seen pop up in here. It makes every Mystical Monument a lodestone and there's a new summoning spell that lets Wizards summon Arcane Fulcrums. Both Arcane Fulcrums and Lodestones give nearby wizards +2 to their channeling rolls. Here's the link:
http://www.fanhammer.org/khaine-progress-of-spells-and-magic-items-Book/?lang=en
I'm happy that they didn't make Chaos Ascendant mandatory in normal games. A mono-god DOC list using Chaos Legions with entirely unbreakable units on top of being able to summon more at will becomes one of the most harrowing experiences that you will ever face bar none. Combine that with End Times magic and the average for 4d6 picking the 2 highest becomes 9.34 with the chance of a double 1 dropping into hundreths of a percent and a 12 becoming a whopping 13.4%. Hell an 11 becomes 18.8%, all those poor wizards 
End Times Magic is just a dice roll to see how many dice you get to roll. It's another set of rolls that limit your tactical options and disguise it as fun when it's just more busywork. Throws the weighting off (the 3 or more Frosthearts on the table will love this) and generally raises the points value further to balance out the sheer number of magical dice you'll be throwing around, whether you get off multiple casts of the same spell or not.
End Times Magic is just a dice roll to see how many dice you get to roll. It's another set of rolls that limit your tactical options and disguise it as fun when it's just more busywork. Throws the weighting off (the 3 or more Frosthearts on the table will love this) and generally raises the points value further to balance out the sheer number of magical dice you'll be throwing around, whether you get off multiple casts of the same spell or not.
LIES!!!! The tomb kings have the missing pages. Vampire counts may be more competitive but the tomb kings have hidden knowledge 
.
http://z4.invisionfree.com/Khemri/index.php?showtopic=15424&st=25
.http://z4.invisionfree.com/Khemri/index.php?showtopic=15424&st=25
There are two pages, 8 & 9. The summary actually contains rules not in the body (yup, it does - that Wizards roll a d6 when dispelling, only in the overview... Yeah, seriously). The two top five going to the defender is in the first paragraph of pg 9.
These rules are so poorly written. It's shameful.
These rules are so poorly written. It's shameful.
Infernal Skull
Wight King
Okay, that sheds more light on the subject. The actual ET Magic rule states:
"A spell can be cast more than once in the Magic phase, as long as it is not:
* A spell for which a failed casting attempt was made in the same Magic phase.
The casting attempt is the roll to beat the spell's casting value. If that roll is equal to or higher than the casting value the spell is cast. (Dispels come later.) So the wording of the rule requires that the casting attempt must not have been failed.
That's quite different than requiring that "the spell was successfully cast." Basically, the way the rule is written, as long as you don't fail the attempt to cast the spell, you can cast it again later (irrespective of any dispel attempt).
And the BRB defines "failing a casting attempt" on p. 32:
"If the result is less than the casting value, the casting attempt has failed. The spell is not cast."
So, that's pretty clear: The only thing that matters for a spell to be recast is that the casting attempt wasn't failed previously. Whether it was dispelled or not doesn't matter.
"A spell can be cast more than once in the Magic phase, as long as it is not:
* A spell for which a failed casting attempt was made in the same Magic phase.
The casting attempt is the roll to beat the spell's casting value. If that roll is equal to or higher than the casting value the spell is cast. (Dispels come later.) So the wording of the rule requires that the casting attempt must not have been failed.
That's quite different than requiring that "the spell was successfully cast." Basically, the way the rule is written, as long as you don't fail the attempt to cast the spell, you can cast it again later (irrespective of any dispel attempt).
And the BRB defines "failing a casting attempt" on p. 32:
"If the result is less than the casting value, the casting attempt has failed. The spell is not cast."
So, that's pretty clear: The only thing that matters for a spell to be recast is that the casting attempt wasn't failed previously. Whether it was dispelled or not doesn't matter.
It'd be nice if it were that simple. Except the overview has different wording and rules that don't appear in the body text. The over view contains rules in it that aren't any where else. Like I said, hot mess. Not to mention, these rules aren't very fun and they are worse with spamming.
Infernal Skull
Wight King
It's sloppy, I'll agree, but the 'rule' for multiple casting is very clearly spelled out on the rules page. An overview is not rules, it's a quick summery of the rules, wherein details can get abbreviated.
If anything, I'd argue that the d6 for dispel dice isn't an actual rule, because it's only casually mentioned in the summary and not a 'proper rule' but the criteria for re-casting a spell is right there.
The overview page even states "here's a brief summary of the changes made to the magic rules. More detailed explanations follow that describe exactly how the rules have changed."
That paragraph is saying that there is a more detailed explanation (on the following page), and that the more detailed description is exactly how the rules have changed. (ie: how they work now, under End Times.
So, again, the recasting part is clear. The only thing that should be in dispute is whether or not to roll a D6 for max dispel dice. (I bet if this page had been online in the regular rotation from the start, people wouldn't even be having a debate over how the recastability worked.)
If anything, I'd argue that the d6 for dispel dice isn't an actual rule, because it's only casually mentioned in the summary and not a 'proper rule' but the criteria for re-casting a spell is right there.
The overview page even states "here's a brief summary of the changes made to the magic rules. More detailed explanations follow that describe exactly how the rules have changed."
That paragraph is saying that there is a more detailed explanation (on the following page), and that the more detailed description is exactly how the rules have changed. (ie: how they work now, under End Times.
So, again, the recasting part is clear. The only thing that should be in dispute is whether or not to roll a D6 for max dispel dice. (I bet if this page had been online in the regular rotation from the start, people wouldn't even be having a debate over how the recastability worked.)
I get all that. I am with you on the RAW part of this. But having used it and referenced it, the overview isn't an overview it contains absolutes and summaries that contradict a poorly laid out rules section. Honestly it feels thrown together and untested. It also ruins the interplay between the players, which was most likely not the intent. Ironically, its obvious the D6 is meant to curb nuke spells but the known every spell of a lore you know one or more spells from means that most wizards at the minimum have the nuke and end times spells of their lore, and many special characters will have multiples. I think these magic rules weren't playtested and they were rushed out the door or not given oversight.
I agree any amount of playtesting would have revealed that these rules make the game take much longer and less enjoyable. Heck, if it was play tested they might have even had a chance to fix the horrible contradictions and poor wording throughout the thing. I played a 4K game with khaine yesterday, I had brought a light council, so I stuck the level4+book of ashur in an arcane fulcrum turn 1, and with the boost from the heirotitan cast Str 7 Banishment at his Demon prince every turn till he ran out of dispel dice or I failed to cast. Turn 3 it paid off I finally nuked the prince, then nuked some skullcrushers off the board. But it was literally roll the dice, ok I'm throwing 2 dice at banishment, it goes, off you dispel repeat. Granted when he finally got in combat I had more spell choices but the first 2 turns I pretty much had banishment, shems, and the lore of vampire ranged attacks. If dispelling could stop it thins would be much better, although the lore master of hoeth would still be ridiculous.
He said in khaine magic he would cast infernal gateway a million times under these rules, or take slaneesh and death to use the OMG end time spell for slaneesh.
He said in khaine magic he would cast infernal gateway a million times under these rules, or take slaneesh and death to use the OMG end time spell for slaneesh.
That's one of the reasons most of my local area is thinking whoever wrote these rules wasn't paying attention to the c terms they were using and when and where they said something. If you include the overview, it sounds like dispelling stops recasting. Without that, all tactical play is gone and the rules turn from hot mess to I would consider not playing warhammer if anything this bad end up in 9th. That's how bad these rules are written.
And I'm not being over dramatic. The rules are torturous and cumbersome to play.
And I'm not being over dramatic. The rules are torturous and cumbersome to play.
I agree, the rules are bad and confusing. With dispelling stopping spells I think the magic would make for a fun casual game, but trying to use it in a competetive setting would be a nightmare.
I sadly agree with Rob (Infernal Skull) that RAW it appears you only have to reach the casting value. BUT...I strongly agree with Najo that the game is unplayable that way. My club is a tournament focused club. Yes we play together informally at garages or game stores but if a rule is not going to be use in our tournament scene we DON'T use it. I cannot see a 'sane' Tournament Organizer trying to put together any event with a modicum of competiveness where they would use these new rules. I would like to further add to Najo's comments that they skew the Reign of Chaos Table and the Frost Phoenix magic table horribly making Chaos and the Phoenix even stronger than they currently are.
People have been putting down those of us who exercise their free will to not play with something that brings us no joy. But I will proudly say that if you insist on forcing the 'unplayable' interpretation on me I will not unpack my toys. I have enough friends of like mind to play my hobby the way that entails some fun and fairness. Rant on.
@Infernal Skull
So i spoke with my associate in GW today. He confirmed that spells can recast as long as you make the casting value. He also confirmed end time spells cannot be dispelled at all. Even as they are cast.
He agreed the rules are poorly written but he hasn't played with them yet.
@Yorga
I think for competitive play, you either ban the rules or say both players have to agree to use them.
So i spoke with my associate in GW today. He confirmed that spells can recast as long as you make the casting value. He also confirmed end time spells cannot be dispelled at all. Even as they are cast.
He agreed the rules are poorly written but he hasn't played with them yet.
@Yorga
I think for competitive play, you either ban the rules or say both players have to agree to use them.
1) I did not see any ambiguity that 'End of Times' spells could be dispelled. Heck, it even says the remains in plays ones cannot be dispelled in subsequent phases.
2) You beat me to punch Najo. Is your associate with "Game Design" or just somebody that perhaps works in mail order? But I read the rules (now that I actually own the book) at lunch time and did not see anything in the overview that supported your position that a 'dispelled' spell was a failed casting attempt. Again, acknowledging that, I will not play that way and will not attend a tournament that rules that way. My time is too precious for meaningless exercises in futility.
1) It all depends on the term successfully cast and if it's before or after dispel occurs. The end times rules use the term as before. The main rulebook uses it as after. If you adhere to the main rule book then read the end times rules including the overview, you will see what I am taking about.
2) My associate is in trade sales. He has direct contact with multiple retailers and thethe GW HQ here in the US. That's a step up from typical mail order answers since he has exposure to a larger official level of information and is getting exposure to current trends too.
Infernal Skull
Wight King
But the End Times rule doesn't use the term "successful casting" and doesn't even talk in terms of the positive, it uses the negative:
The rule is not: "the spell must be successfully cast."
The rule is: "the casting attempt must not have failed."
The "casting attempt" and a "dispel attempt" are two completely different things. And the rule for recasting spells only applies to the casting attempt.
Under End Times magic, when casting a spell: If the casting attempt doesn't fail, the spell can be attempted again later in the same magic phase. AND ALSO: If the casting attempt doesn't fail, a dispel attempt can be made. Whether or not that dispel is successful has no bearing on whether or not the same spell can be attempted again.
Only the Overview's summery mentions spells being successfully cast, and that's not the rule, it's the brief summary. The book even states as much at the start of the Overview.
That's why it's important to read the pages in order (and why I've been trying so hard to find all of the rules pages in their correct order).
The only thing that should be in dispute is rolling for dispel dice, because that doesn't appear to have a proper rule outside of the Overview.
Last edited:
I'm not challenging your conclusion. In fact I replied and confirmed that GW said the same thing you did about failed spells. I was pointing out to Yorga how some of the conclusions were gotten to by some people. Though still, the two pages of rules are inconsistent, the over view doesn't match the body of rules and a number of circumstances arise that the rules don't address.
Does anything of this "dispel don't make casting failure, only stopping it's effect" have any effect on lore attributes?
dispelling stops lore attributes, the spell effect is nullified which mean any lore attribute is nullified as well
This is what the rules say.
Casting:
- If you fail to cast a spell, you can't recast it, no matter the value or version.
- If you cast a <15 spell, it can be recast, even if dispelled.
- If you cast a 15+ spell, it (or any other version) cannot be recast.
- If you cast an End Times spell, it cannot be recast.
Dispelling:
- You must choose whether to use a wizard or not.
- If you don't choose a wizard to dispel with, you don't have to randomize how many dice you get.
- If you do choose a wizard to dispel with, you must choose whether you'll use a scroll or dice before you randomize how many dice you get to use.
- If you fail to dispel, the rules are still in place that that wizard can no longer dispel, so no more bonus. Very important difference to casting!
Casting:
- If you fail to cast a spell, you can't recast it, no matter the value or version.
- If you cast a <15 spell, it can be recast, even if dispelled.
- If you cast a 15+ spell, it (or any other version) cannot be recast.
- If you cast an End Times spell, it cannot be recast.
Dispelling:
- You must choose whether to use a wizard or not.
- If you don't choose a wizard to dispel with, you don't have to randomize how many dice you get.
- If you do choose a wizard to dispel with, you must choose whether you'll use a scroll or dice before you randomize how many dice you get to use.
- If you fail to dispel, the rules are still in place that that wizard can no longer dispel, so no more bonus. Very important difference to casting!
Broken concentration is only a casting rule, not a dispelling one.
You may wish to reread pp.32 and 35.
In what book?