|
Post by stevie on Nov 17, 2019 16:44:46 GMT
When two Magicians launch a distant magical attack, usually one is the main ensorceller (costing 2 PIPs) with the second Magician supporting it (costing another PIP) in order to give the target a -1. But can the two Magicians make two separate attacks (costing 4 PIPs) at the same target? As an extreme example, consider two Magicians making two separate attacks against a Behemoth. The first attack could cause the Behemoth to flee 600p, then the second Magician targets the same Behemoth to make it flee another 600p...that’s a total flee move of 1200p, all in a single bound! Is this allowed?...or, as the Behemoth will be facing away after the first flee move, would it flee directly to its rear in the second flee move and end up fleeing towards the Magicians? Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes And here is the latest Jan 2019 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2019_1st_Quarter
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Nov 17, 2019 17:11:59 GMT
In my 2014 v 2.1 rules page 20 Magical attacks. It says that " A second or third magician element that bespells the same target element aids the bespelling of the first (main bespeller) instead of its action being resolved separately."
Simon
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 17, 2019 17:29:35 GMT
Ah...well spotted Simon you old rule lawyer you. Still, when a Behemoth, Flyer, or Airboat flees in one bound, and doesn’t move in its bound, it will be facing away, and another flee means it will turn and run 600p towards the enemy (depending on its original facing of course).
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Nov 17, 2019 19:02:08 GMT
Ah...well spotted Simon you old rule lawyer you. Still, when a Behemoth, Flyer, or Airboat flees in one bound, and doesn’t move in its bound, it will be facing away, and another flee means it will turn and run 600p towards the enemy (depending on its original facing of course). I vaguely remember a similar discussion about shooting at LH from the rear - the rules suggesting that they turned about and charged the shooter. I generally play it that they keep on going away from the shooter. Simon
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 18, 2019 8:22:02 GMT
The question is surely why would you want to spend an extra PIP doing this?
The only scenario I could see it working is if the second magician was outside bespelling range at the start of the turn but the fleeing element then came in range, but in this case why would you reserve another 2 PIPs just in case the target element fled?
However as Simon has pointed out, the rules says magicians can't target the same target element separately, you have to aid the first magician, therefore the situation quoted wouldn't arise so whether it would turn and flee back does not come into consideration.
But imagine you bespelled a Behemoth which then fled into range of Art. Then the question arises and with a strict reading of the rules I would say yes, it would flee back to it's original position. So I guess if you could, you'd fire the Art at anything else you could to avoid this happening.
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Nov 18, 2019 9:29:44 GMT
The question is surely why would you want to spend an extra PIP doing this? The only scenario I could see it working is if the second magician was outside bespelling range at the start of the turn but the fleeing element then came in range, but in this case why would you reserve another 2 PIPs just in case the target element fled? However as Simon has pointed out, the rules says magicians can't target the same target element separately, you have to aid the first magician, therefore the situation quoted wouldn't arise so whether it would turn and flee back does not come into consideration. But imagine you bespelled a Behemoth which then fled into range of Art. Then the question arises and with a strict reading of the rules I would say yes, it would flee back to it's original position. So I guess if you could, you'd fire the Art at anything else you could to avoid this happening. Actually, I wonder if a Behemoth that is shot on its rear edge should do the following: 1. Turn 180 degrees if shot entirely on its rear edge P24 second para from bottom in v2.1 2104 edition. 2. Then following rules for fleeing - first recoil backwards 3. Then turn 180 degrees and moves its flee distance. See section on Fleeing p 25. " A fleeing element first recoil as above" ie this includes turning 180 if entirly shot at on rear base. Simon
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 18, 2019 10:45:00 GMT
The question is surely why would you want to spend an extra PIP doing this? The only scenario I could see it working is if the second magician was outside bespelling range at the start of the turn but the fleeing element then came in range, but in this case why would you reserve another 2 PIPs just in case the target element fled? Why would you want to do this? I’ll tell you why...recoiling a Behemoth/Airboat/Flyer twice would take it right off the table! 1200p/12 inches is a looooong way, from the table centre-line to a base edge. However, if a target can only be zapped once by magic in a bound, then it can’t happen. Interestingly, DBA contains a line that says “Targets exposed by outcome moves can be shot at.” (See DBA 3.0, “Distant Shooting”, page 10, paragraph 3, second sentence)HoTT 2.1 has no equivalent line saying this. As for which way they flee, I think Simon has nailed it. 👍
|
|