Menace Question

[Morgan Vening]

Was watching a game recently with a lot of Menace capable models (Guild Captain and 3 Guild Guards). And a question came up regarding Menace.

If it's successfully cast, but also successfully resisted, does the movement portion of the spell still take effect?

(1) Menace

(CC: 10/Rst: Wp/Rg: 6) Move this model up to 4” toward target model. Target may not take move Actions unil the Start Closing Phase.

The discussion came about because the Rules Manual says

If the resisting model's final Duel total is greater than the casting total, the resisting model has won the Duel, and succesfully resisted the Spell, avoiding it's effects.

The discussion centered around the following points.

• Menace's first effect doesn't actually affect the target. It just sets criteria for the acting model's movement.
  
• Resisting doesn't cancel the spell, just stops it affecting the target.
  
• Menace, given it's limitations (requires a target within 6", has ~37% chance of failing) seems pretty weak if resisting it also stops the movement as well.
  

I honestly had no idea when asked, but it seemed like a question worth asking about.

Morgan Vening

[Morgan Vening]

If it was ruled to be an addiitonal requirement, the Guards Captain has just gained a huge boost to his mobility.

Not really. He gets an extra 1" on his movement, only if there's an enemy in LOS within 10". Sure, he can Menace friendly models too, if moving closer to them is advantageous, and the "no move" ability isn't going to hinder them, but he can do that already.

Re walk being a requirement... :facepalm

Yeah, it's a bit of a stretch. But I can see some justification for it, given some of the whackadoodle rules already in the game. Like most of the Lawyer, Secretary's Aide's abilities. Or Pull My Finger. Malifaux definitely tends to blur the line between 'reality' and silly. Part of what I find interesting about the game.

So in the case of a successfully cast and successfully resisted Menace, I'd say the caster still takes the movement.

I'm probably wrong somewhere along the line and just not seeing it though.

You might be wrong. But you've come to the same conclusion I have, for the same reasons, from the exact same rules. And I don't mind being wrong, as long as I know a) I am actually wrong, why I'm wrong, and c) how I can avoid being wrong in the future.

Morgan Vening

[Q'iq'el]

I've found the past ruling in this thread: http://wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22511&highlight=spell+discard+counters

I now recognize I misunderstood it. I thought succeeding in a Casting Duel had meant succeeding in the entire Duel, while the rules seem to be referencing only the first of the two Simple Duels (Ca->CC).

In other words, I agree that if the spell casting fails, no cost is paid, but if casting succeeds and then the spell gets resisted by the opponent, the caster still has to pay the additional costs.

The probable reason why I've been confused for such a long time is that reasonably few offensive spells have additional requirements, while summoning spells, which are known for having requirements, have no Resist Duel most of the time. All in all, it is one more reason to burn Soulstones on all the Colette offensive spells, that have a SS cost attached to them.

Side question -> how do you play Punk Zombie's Self Mutilation then? Is it about the only spell where you meet additional requirements even before you start Casting it? (as you must do it before picking up the target?). Or do you cast it first, reduce the wounds and then pick up the target, treating the wording as a permission to reverse usual order of things (there is still a Rst Duel involved after picking up the target)?

Edited December 22, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Q'iq'el]

Also, there has been a separate ruling, by the Weird Sketch I believe, that if one effect of the Spell fails, all the effects fail. That means regardless of whether the Spell has a Rst Duel attached to it or not, if for some reason you cannot execute one of the effects (no place to place a summoned model, no way to move your model etc.), the entire spell fails and no effects take place.　

I believe these kind of situations can prevent you from having to meet the requirements of the spell, as long as the spell has no Rst: Duel (because if there is no Resist Duel, the Requirements of the spell and the effects of the spell are applied at the same time).

This is the only way I can connect these two rulings, personally. Otherwise they conflict.

Because additional requirements must appear in first sequence, and because of the above-mentioned rulings, I think we must treat the rules on page 51 literally:

1) Requirements must be in the first line of the description.

2) Requirements include: Suffering Wd, sacrificing/discarding Counters or SS, sacrificing/killing friendly models.

3) Other requirements must be indicated by wording: "Ar: <requirement>".

Nothing else can count as a requirement, even if it is in the first line of the spell Description.

That in turn means not only the Guild Captain doesn't get to move 4", but there is also a possibility failure to move means other effects of his spell also fail (depends on whether you consider moving 0" a movement "up to 4" or if movement up to 4" must be > 0"; I'm not sure about that).

Edited December 22, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Morgan Vening]

Side question -> how do you play Punk Zombie's Self Mutilation then? Is it about the only spell where you meet additional requirements even before you start Casting it? (as you must do it before picking up the target?). Or do you cast it first' date= reduce the wounds and then pick up the target, treating the wording as a permission to reverse usual order of things (there is still a Rst Duel involved after picking up the target)?

It seems like it's the exception to the rule, explicitly because it's spelled out as such. There isn't anything that seems to change the order with regards selecting target, so I believe it's

Take Wounds, Select Target, Cast Total, Additional Costs (none innate, but something else might affect it, like something requiring a discard to cast), Target Resist, Resolve Effects.

[Q'iq'el]

Here's where the difference in perspective seems to be. You seem to be interpreting "Resist = Fail". I see "Resist = Unaffected". Neither (for the moment), is officially recognized as correct. Hence the discussion, until ruled otherwise.

I'm mostly alluding to difference between spells that have requirement and then cause a Rst. Duel, and the spells which immediately succeed after meeting the Requirements.

Example A) A hypothetical offensive spell that causes damage if unresisted and requires spending a Soulstone. You have to spend the Soulstone after you succeed the Ca->CC duel, but then the target can still Resist the spell and no other effect will be applied (But the Soulstone has already been spent before the Resist).

Example A hypothetical spell which gives extra movement, but requires discarding a card. Normally you'd succeed Ca->CC, meet requirements then move, but if you cannot move, then what?

Then you don't spend the Card, because at that point you fail the casting due to not being able to execute some of the effects and because it is the same stage as meeting requirements, you don't have to meet the requirements anymore.

That is the only way I can justify ruling that you have to meet the requirements after you succeed Ca->CC Duel with the ruling (IIRC), that you don't have to Sacrifice models, discard Counters or Soulstones etc. if you fail casting some of the Summoning spells and such.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Kadeton]

Example A hypothetical spell which gives extra movement, but requires discarding a card. Normally you'd succeed Ca->CC, meet requirements then move, but if you cannot move, then what?

Then you don't spend the Card, because at that point you fail the casting due to not being able to execute some of the effects and because it is the same stage as meeting requirements, you don't have to meet the requirements anymore.

That is the only way I can justify ruling that you have to meet the requirements after you succeed Ca->CC Duel with the ruling (IIRC), that you don't have to Sacrifice models, discard Counters or Soulstones etc. if you fail casting some of the Summoning spells and such.

Why would you cast a spell to grant extra movement if you couldn't move?

The additional requirements don't have to be met if you fail to cast the spell (Final Casting Total < CC). Meeting ARs is a choice that the caster makes, not a mandatory instruction. However, if you do make the CC, the requirements must be met in order for the spell to be successful.

[Q'iq'el]

Why would you cast a spell to grant extra movement if you couldn't move?

The additional requirements don't have to be met if you fail to cast the spell (Final Casting Total < CC). Meeting ARs is a choice that the caster makes, not a mandatory instruction. However, if you do make the CC, the requirements must be met in order for the spell to be successful.

In the past it's been chiefly discussed in regard to summoning spells which have no resist duels in most cases.

The ruling back then was, that if you cast, let's say Reanimate, succeed in Ca->CC duel and then discover there is not enough place to put your summoned miniature on the table (an unlikely occurrence, but possible), then you don't have to pay Body Counter for the summon, even though it is a Requirement.

So the intention, at the very least, is that the failure to execute the spell prevents the player from paying whatever the additional requirements demand, even though he succeeded in Ca->CC duel and tried to apply the effect... or in other words, the Additional Requirements are not the same thing as spell cost - if you cannot apply the effects for some reasons, then you don't have to pay these.

This is the reason why many players, including me, thought a successful resist means you don't pay for the spell... but in case of the spell the spell succeeds and the effects are not applied because the target has resisted them, and not because they were for some reason impossible to apply.

This is still a bit confusing to me - even this explanation, which tries to connect both rulings from the past, seems to leave plenty of unanswered questions.

For example, if I cast a spell, it doesn't get resisted, but I discover I cannot apply all the effects... and the spell fails... what do I do with the Additional Requirements?

[Kadeton]

I don't think there's any need for confusion. ARs are quite simple: you either pay them, or the spell fails. You don't HAVE to pay them.

All this stuff about the spell failing if the effects can't be applied seems like an overcomplication of this situation. If you find that a spell can't work like you wanted it to (not enough room to place a model, etc) then just choose not to pay the AR.

For example' date=' if I cast a spell, it doesn't get resisted, but I discover I cannot apply all the effects... and the spell fails... what do I do with the Additional Requirements?[/quote']

Again, if you cast a spell, you must pay the AR before any resist duels are attempted. If, after beating the CC, you realise that the spell isn't going to work properly, just don't pay the AR. The spell fails. No resist duel is made.

If you've already beat the CC, paid the AR, won the resist duel and THEN you realise that the effects can't be applied properly... suck it up, or ask your opponent nicely if you can take it back.

[Wolfgar]

Side question -> how do you play Punk Zombie's Self Mutilation then? Is it about the only spell where you meet additional requirements even before you start Casting it? (as you must do it before picking up the target?). Or do you cast it first, reduce the wounds and then pick up the target, treating the wording as a permission to reverse usual order of things (there is still a Rst Duel involved after picking up the target)?

How I would run it is you declare the spell, Inflict the number of Wounds, select the target and proceed as normal. It may mean you damage yourself for no gain, but hey, they're zombies and not known for tactical brilliance.

[Twisted Metal]

I hate to revive an old thread like this but it came up again in a game and it was kind of important. Does the move in menace occur even if the spell is resisted?

[Shadai]

I think it is similar to the Performer's Siren's Call spell. It is just like Menace but without the acting model moving. When the Performer casts Siren's Call, the target (if it fails the resist duel) moves it Wk towards the Performer. And some stuff happens. But the stuff isn't what we're talking about. Since the performer's cast, if resisted, doesn't make the target model walk toward, then it should be the same for Menace. If the spell is resisted, its resisted. When a spell is resisted, NONE of its effects take affect. Meaning, no cast, no move, no stuff.

[Morgan Vening]

I think it is similar to the Performer's Siren's Call spell. It is just like Menace but without the acting model moving. When the Performer casts Siren's Call, the target (if it fails the resist duel) moves it Wk towards the Performer. And some stuff happens. But the stuff isn't what we're talking about. Since the performer's cast, if resisted, doesn't make the target model walk toward, then it should be the same for Menace.

Siren's Call is a bad analogy (As written in Rising Powers. Not sure if the card changed it significantly). Because the second effect is absolutely reliant on the first effect. "If the target moves within this model's melee range". For Menace, the movement effect isn't targetting the model in a direct sense. It uses the word target, but the effect is only applied to the casting model.

If the spell is resisted, its resisted. When a spell is resisted, NONE of its effects take affect. Meaning, no cast, no move, no stuff.

That may be how it's intended, but that's not necessarily what the rules say. The Rules Manual is pretty unclear (pg 54, sections 3E and 4), that it's possible to interpret it either way, and tends to lean towards 'Resist doesn't cancel the spell, just stops the spell from effecting the Resister'. At least that's how I read it.

Morgan Vening

[Shadai]

That may be how it's intended, but that's not necessarily what the rules say. The Rules Manual is pretty unclear (pg 54, sections 3E and 4), that it's possible to interpret it either way, and tends to lean towards 'Resist doesn't cancel the spell, just stops the spell from effecting the Resister'. At least that's how I read it.

My understanding of the spellcasting rules is if the spell is resisted, it's considered to have never gone off. Similar in the way if you fail to cast the spell in the first place. Menace doesn't state that you move the model, THEN cast. It's cast first, then you get the effects, and one of the effects happens to be a move.

[Calmdown]

Im surprised this has even gotten to 4 pages

When you cast a spell, you cast and then check resist. If the spell is resisted, none of the spell's effects happen - whether they are on the target, the caster, or both.

So you don't move if Menace is resisted. You're interpreting something from the rules that is not in any way alluded to, and there is no precedent for currently (emphasis: currently).

If you were correct, it would mean that McMourning would gain a body part from Wracked with Pain regardless of whether he cast the spell successfully or not, Flesh Construct's Fling would push it into melee regardless of casting success or failure, etc etc. There are many spells in the game, not just Menace, that have effects other than that on the target. They don't work when resisted.

Sorry, but Menace still sucks

Edited February 28, 2012 by Calmdown

[GrAYFoX]

Have a read of this thread, it outlines when a spell has been successfully cast. In it, the Menace spell was brought up and acknowledged to be a possible two-part effect. Unfortunately, AFAIK a ruling was never made either way:

http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?27756-When-is-a-spell-successfully-cast

Edited February 28, 2012 by GrAYFoX

[Morgan Vening]

My understanding of the spellcasting rules is if the spell is resisted, it's considered to have never gone off. Similar in the way if you fail to cast the spell in the first place. Menace doesn't state that you move the model, THEN cast. It's cast first, then you get the effects, and one of the effects happens to be a move.

That's how most people who disagree have approached it, but as GrayFox's link says, that's not the way it works. If you cast Obey, hit your Target Number, and the target resists, then you can't attempt it again that activation.

Im surprised this has even gotten to 4 pages

That's because no-one's yet definitively proven one way or another how it works, or how it's supposed to work.

When you cast a spell, you cast and then check resist. If the spell is resisted, none of the spell's effects happen - whether they are on the target, the caster, or both.

That's not what the Rules Manual says. Section 3E of the Rules Manual goes to significant lengths to say the resisting model avoids the effects. It doesn't say the spell is countered, or has no effect, or any other wording.

So you don't move if Menace is resisted. You're interpreting something from the rules that is not in any way alluded to, and there is no precedent for currently (emphasis: currently).

Actually, by my reading, it's alluded to quite well. I'm still yet to see any evidence, or a ruling, for the interpretation you (and a not unsubstantial number of others) are claiming. But without more information on how it's supposed to be interpreted, or a definitive ruling, I still argue that the current circumstances are vague.

If you were correct, it would mean that McMourning would gain a body part from Wracked with Pain regardless of whether he cast the spell successfully or not, Flesh Construct's Fling would push it into melee regardless of casting success or failure, etc etc. There are many spells in the game, not just Menace, that have effects other than that on the target. They don't work when resisted.

The way it's worded right now, specifically Sections 3E and 4, and GrayFox's link, if I had to make a ruling based on the words, I'd say you got the Body Part. The Fling thing, unless you had a way of expanding the spell's range, or shortening the FC's melee range, would never happen as you cast the spell while within melee range.

Now that's not to say that's how the spells are intended to work. Just how I see as the most rational way to interpret the rules, as written.

Sorry, but Menace still sucks

To be clear, I don't really have much of a vested interest in it working either way (other than having an ability on the few models I have, actually be useful), but I do see it as an unclear rule that deserves clarification.

Morgan Vening