Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,023 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just reading through the new 8th edition rulebook and thought I would put this issue up for discussion -

On page 505 of the RuleBook the Ruby Ring Of Ruin states it has the Bound Spell (power level 3) of FireBall - the signature spell for lore of fire (page 492).

Now my query is this - the Fireball spell has 3 different power levels the 1st one doing D6 worth of damage the last doing 3D6, nowhere can I see states that this ring can't be used to do the maximum damage at the maximum range, as it stands to read this means I can take this cheap magic item and use and abuse it.

What are your thoughts on this item?
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
EDIT- wrong, but I'll leave it here

Yeah, the fireball spell has 3 options... so I dont see why you cant cast a lv3 fireball with it.Very nasty thing to do though- wait til the end of your magic phase and then cast that on 1-2 dice after the enemy is out of dispel dice.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,023 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Tim?Steve further rewading on page 37 says that bound spells are unfortunately the easier unboosted version of the spell so in this case just D6... oh well.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,023 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Yeah, it would be a widely abused item otherwise, mind you I think it still will be for 25pts nothing like a hidden magic spell after all dispell dice have gone to give the opponets unit that little extra punch in the groin at the end!
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
I doubt it- I'll be pretty obvious that the enemy is up to something if they keep dice back after using their last available spell... and even if they do trick you the first time 1D6 S4 hits really isnt worth caring too much about. If the enemy holds just 1 DD back then its unlikely to get the ruby ring off: 2D6 PD is probably going to be beaten by 1D6 DD if it has a +4 or +5 to dispel that a lot of games I'm playing seem to have- I'm choosing to take a bare ogre slaughtermaster over a fully equipped butcher in my 2k games currently: I need to scrap 6pts off my standard tyrant build to fit it in, and its an increase of 20pts on the equipped butcher but the additional +2 to cast and dispel (plus stats) means its well worth taking.
 

·
I Piss in your Cheerios
Joined
·
7,370 Posts
To be honest, I don't think the item is really that big a deal. Much like the Featherfoe Torc above, it does to little for too much. Maybe if they had removed the Wargear Limits, when putting percentages back.

Actually, no, not even then. lol
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
Yeah, have to say that I was massively excited when I heard there would be a lot of new options in the book... but their reality isnt that exciting. I recon there is about 16 of the new items that I would ever use... and since I love the new scolls, many of the banners (I play ogres- I dont have any good banners of my own) and all of the potions thats not all that impressive for the rest (I only like 2 weapons, 2 armours and no talismans- if I could have multiple of my own gnoblar thiefstones then I would never think to use the common talismans).

Having said that I dont particuarly like the option I feel I have to say that I love that they exist- extra option and surprises can only be a good thing.. especially since everyone can make use of them (in theory- wish I could have more then 2 magical banners in any ogre army).
 

·
I Piss in your Cheerios
Joined
·
7,370 Posts
Yeah, have to say that I was massively excited when I heard there would be a lot of new options in the book... but their reality isnt that exciting. I recon there is about 16 of the new items that I would ever use... and since I love the new scolls, many of the banners (I play ogres- I dont have any good banners of my own) and all of the potions thats not all that impressive for the rest (I only like 2 weapons, 2 armours and no talismans- if I could have multiple of my own gnoblar thiefstones then I would never think to use the common talismans).

Having said that I dont particuarly like the option I feel I have to say that I love that they exist- extra option and surprises can only be a good thing.. especially since everyone can make use of them (in theory- wish I could have more then 2 magical banners in any ogre army).
Oh very much. Variety is the spine of life. Or something. :laugh:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,108 Posts
What am i...the only person that thinks its funny to throw the ring on a greyseer? A rat shooting fire...or an ogre shooting fire! even with the basic level spell its great.
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
For 25pts.. yeah you might be :p
I think I would prefer to take a potion of strength/toughness on either the ogre or the grey seer. Suddenly having a T8 ogre would be funny... and while a S7 D3 wound weapon might not scare a steam tank now if Im S10 for the turn it might be a different matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
617 Posts
Okkam's Mindrazor is nasty, where a model's leadership can be used as strength. Strength 8 chaos warriors? Yes please. Much better than any potion.
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
although not the armour modifiers of s8
... possibly, thats an iffy one to call.


I do like the occam's mindrazor spell, although I'm hovering between shadow and death for teclis to use with my HE army- such a shame I cant use both.

The strength potion would mostly be used with my ogres, but only if I start playing a lot of empire armies. I would be tempted to switch out the tenderiser for a siegebreaker+ stregnth potion on my tyrant. Means that I'll have S10 for a turn (well, S11 really but its above the cap) so if able to charge the steam tank I would have 5 auto-hits that wound on a 4+ and do D6 wounds... otherwise I would be wounding only on a 6 (though 1-2 lucky wounds with either the tenderiser or the siegebreaker would be enough to severly mess the tank up for teh game I doubt my tyrant would survive to the games end... and he costs the same as the tank (plus being the general). Other then that I would have to rely on a S2 magic missile to damage the tank... ignores armour saves though so is still pretty effective (assuming I have enough butchers to cast it a few times).
 

·
I Piss in your Cheerios
Joined
·
7,370 Posts
Okkam's Mindrazor is nasty, where a model's leadership can be used as strength. Strength 8 chaos warriors? Yes please. Much better than any potion.
And much better on Dwarves. lol If only...

After all - it's not like Chaos Warriors need any sort of buff to hand things their heads. It's just that they're too few and too expensive, and too slow.

I might not yet be competent enough to spot what's GOD, in WFB...but I know what's BAD - and WoC are that.
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
sorry you do get the modifiers just not any s bonuses frm weapons
Actually Im not so sure that you weren't correct. It says you use your Ld to wound teh enemy instead of strength... but it does not say that this affects the enemy saving throw, which is altered by the strength of the attack. So I think that technically RAW means that you would use your Ld unmodded by weapons to find the to-wound value, but that armour value would be altered by the strength of the attacker and his weapon (plus ASL if you have a great weapon)... what do the rest of you think?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,559 Posts
...RAW means that you would use your Ld unmodded by weapons to find the to-wound value, but that armour value would be altered by the strength of the attacker and his weapon (plus ASL if you have a great weapon)... what do the rest of you think?
The (Really) Big Rule Book says "...when rolling to wound...." so I also interpret it as using strength for everything other than wounding, i.e. armour modifiers.

I am absolutely certain it would not affect the rules of special weapons like Great Weapons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,166 Posts
Where do you get the idea that there's a separate section for "Strength modifiers" that isn't "Rolling to wound"?
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top