A couple of question regarding Seamus Avatar

[Thaarup]

Hi,

I just had the pleasure of meeting my first Avatar (Avatar of Dread) opponent this week...and a few questions popped up. Now, we dont have the book with Avatars in it, only the card from buying the model, so maybe some of my questions are pretty easy to answer...but here goes.

1. Is it possible to remove the the "extra enhancing terror ability (+2 tn and -2 wp)" with a witchling dispel magic/ or some other effect removing ability?

2. Does an Avatar gives extra VP in some schemes/strategies (like slaughter)?

3. How does Ryle´s (guild) "Breach Psychosis" vs. aSeamus "Anathema" talent work?

4. If a Dobbelganger mimics Avatar of Dreads Anathema/Terror ability does it get the "basic" one or the "enhanced" version (if aSeamus has used said ability)?

And finally a more terror/morale related question:

5. When a model has to test for terror entering another models terror range effect and loses said duel, is it then considered to be in melee range or not?

Example; Witchling tries to enter aSeamus terrifying effects range (3") but fails the duel. Is the witchling now engaged with aSeamus, so he can make a disengaging strike and use "wicked" to deal damage before the witchling runs away?

Any answer would be appreciated

Cheers

[Ausplosions]

1: not sure

2: no

3: He is affected as he doesn't have anathema

4: Avatar talents and abilities cannot be copied.

5: if the melee range of the terrifying model is the same as his terryfying range then yes.

[Boshea]

1.Yes

2.No

3.Assuming Anathema gets around Breach Psychosis. Anathema ignores all immunity to Morale duels, which immunity to WP duels covers.

4.Edit-Forgot can't copy an Avatar

5.Yes

[Ratty]

Yep those all look right to me.

[Guardian]

Once again, witchling rules

[Thaarup]

Thanks for the quick answers! Much appreciated.

Just to be a bit of an ***

..Why does Ryles talent "Breach psychosis get nulled? From the wording of his talent ("This model is immune to other model´s talent and spells that require it to make WP duels".) it seems that is what Anathema specifically does? What am I missing?

Oh, and came up with a bonus question:

6. What constitute a "moving action"* - as per the "menace" spell? I can see what are "general move actions" (move, charge and jump) but does it affect other actions ("non general movement actions" ) like Dr. Mcmornings "Scalpel Slingin" and others like that?

*"moving action" = "move Action".

Edited February 1, 2013 by Thaarup
CLARIFICATION

[Ratty]

Scalpel Slingin will now work as it is now a Place not a Push, since the Errata on Push into Base to Base... however Pushes that state a distance still count as movement effects.

[Thaarup]

Thanks Ratty!!!

[Therril_83]

Hold on.. Menace states "..may not take move Actions", the word "Action" even being in capital, to me seems it would imply Actions that specifically move you. Not actions that has an additional effect of also moving you. Is this wrong then?

For example, if I cast Menace on a Guild Guard, could that Guild Guard in his turn then cast Menace himself? Could he not cast it, because there is a move involved in the effect of the spell, or could he cast it, he just doesn't perform the moving part of the spell himself?

[Thaarup]

@DaemonChild; Would that not be similar to the "General Move Action" Charge? You move and then in addition make a strike (with bonus flip on damage)?

But yes it would be nice to know if all actions/spells that included some kind of movement effect would constitute a move Action of some kind?

[PZN]

Why does Ryles talent "Breach psychosis get nulled? From the wording of his talent ("This model is immune to other model´s talent and spells that require it to make WP duels".) it seems that is what Anathema specifically does? What am I missing?

It's because of the wording of Anathema:

"This model's Terrifying Ability affects all enemy models that do not have the Anathema Ability. This model's Terrifying Ability ignores any immunity to Morale Duels."

Pretty clear I guess.

[Thaarup]

It's because of the wording of Anathema:

"This model's Terrifying Ability affects all enemy models that do not have the Anathema Ability. This model's Terrifying Ability ignores any immunity to Morale Duels."

Pretty clear I guess.

So it is because Anathema in itself does not force WP duels? Because otherwise I would argue that the Anathema talent forces the target to make terrifying test (which is a WP duel) and that is something Breach specific counters?

[Therril_83]

@DaemonChild; Would that not be similar to the "General Move Action" Charge? You move and then in addition make a strike (with bonus flip on damage)?

But yes it would be nice to know if all actions/spells that included some kind of movement effect would constitute a move Action of some kind?

What makes charge a very clear case is that it is defined in the rule book as a general move action, so being forbidden to use move actions couldn't possibly allow the use of anything mentioned there. I would also think it's fairly clear that things like Driven by Purpose (suffer 1wd, push 3") is a clear move action, it's an action and all it does is move you. But is "move action" any kind of action the contains moving as part of what it does?

As per Rattys answere regarding scalpel slinging, I would assume that the spell is meant to forbid any kind of movement that is caused by the model itself. But actually states pretty clearly "movement Action", which is what makes me unsure.

[PZN]

So it is because Anathema in itself does not force WP duels? Because otherwise I would argue that the Anathema talent forces the target to make terrifying test (which is a WP duel) and that is something Breach specific counters?

This model's Terrifying Ability ignores any immunity to Morale Duels.

A Moral duel is a WP duel.

You got immunity from your ability immune to WP duels and lose the immunity to Morale Duels forced by Anathema.

If a Model has Anathema and u entering the Models Terrifying range every Model has to perform a Morale duel expect your Model has the Anathema ability too!

[nix]

Scalpel Slinging is not a movement action because of the Errata. The Errata made it so that anything that "moves into base to base" becomes a place. Per RM pg 38, Place, Replace, and Switch are all Placement Effects. This makes Scalpel Slinging a Placement Action.

Movement effects are summarized on RM pg 35, and include Walk, Charge, Jump, Move using the Walk/Charge stat, Push, and Fall Back. Any action which invoked one of those effects is a Movement Action.

[Thaarup]

@PZN; I am not sure I get it yet ..but I will try looking at it again. Thanks for trying to explain it to me.

Scalpel Slinging is not a movement action because of the Errata. The Errata made it so that anything that "moves into base to base" becomes a place. Per RM pg 38, Place, Replace, and Switch are all Placement Effects. This makes Scalpel Slinging a Placement Action.

Movement effects are summarized on RM pg 35, and include Walk, Charge, Jump, Move using the Walk/Charge stat, Push, and Fall Back. Any action which invoked one of those effects is a Movement Action.

Thanks! So just to be sure I understand this correctly. All actions/spells with a movement effect in it is a movement Action? So Lure is a move Action?

Example; Guild Guard Captain casts Menace on Madame Sybelle. So now Madame Sybelle can´t use the Lure spell as it is a move action (there are a push effect included in the spell), but she is allowed to cast Call Belle as it is now (with the erata) a placement Action?

Seems I might have underestimated the dear Captain a bit...

[Ausplosions]

No, lure would not move Sybelle it would move her lure target.

Menace would need to be on the target of the lure.

And the same for Call Belle ( although this is a placement effect anyway....)

[Therril_83]

I know and understand that push-into-base is now a place, and place isn't movement.

I also have no issue with "movement effects", what is considered a "movement effect" is perfectly clear on pg35. But again, what causes this question from me is the word "Action" (which is, again, capitalized, in the spell). The RM only contains what is considered general movement actions, not what defines a movement action (if it does, I've missed it, pg reference would be appreciated).

It seems we could derive from Rattys response earlier in the thread that a movement action is any and all actions performed by the model itself that contains a movement effect as part of the action. And pre-erata this would have included Scalpel Slinging, but since this is now a placement effect it does not any longer.

Can I get comments in favour or against this view?

So a model affected by Menace could not walk or charge, neither could it use Menace or Come Hither, or Quick Retreat. It could use triggers like Next Target or Reposition, because they are not actions. And it could be lured, since that is not the models' own action.

[Thaarup]

No, lure would not move Sybelle it would move her lure target.

Hmm, but Menace does not state that it is the target themself that are not allowed to move..only that the target is not allowed to make a move Action? Lure uses movement effects, even though it is not on the casting model itself - so is that not a move Action? Is it only a move Action if you move the activated model?

Menace would need to be on the target of the lure.

And the same for Call Belle ( although this is a placement effect anyway....)

But you can lure a model that is effected by Menace as it is only the model affected by Menace that are not allowed to make a move Action.

EDIT: As "DaemonChild" explained in a much more clear way than what I tried to do

Edited February 3, 2013 by Thaarup
clarification

[Kadeton]

A quick-and-easy definition of a movement action would be an action that produces a movement effect on the acting model.

[nix]

@PZN; I am not sure I get it yet ..but I will try looking at it again. Thanks for trying to explain it to me.

Thanks! So just to be sure I understand this correctly. All actions/spells with a movement effect in it is a movement Action? So Lure is a move Action?

Example; Guild Guard Captain casts Menace on Madame Sybelle. So now Madame Sybelle can´t use the Lure spell as it is a move action (there are a push effect included in the spell), but she is allowed to cast Call Belle as it is now (with the erata) a placement Action?

Seems I might have underestimated the dear Captain a bit...

Casting Lure is a Cast action for Sybelle. It is a Movement Effect for her Target (the target is not taking an action).

---------- Post added at 09:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:21 AM ----------

I know and understand that push-into-base is now a place, and place isn't movement.

I also have no issue with "movement effects", what is considered a "movement effect" is perfectly clear on pg35. But again, what causes this question from me is the word "Action" (which is, again, capitalized, in the spell). The RM only contains what is considered general movement actions, not what defines a movement action (if it does, I've missed it, pg reference would be appreciated).

It seems we could derive from Rattys response earlier in the thread that a movement action is any and all actions performed by the model itself that contains a movement effect as part of the action. And pre-erata this would have included Scalpel Slinging, but since this is now a placement effect it does not any longer.

Can I get comments in favour or against this view?

So a model affected by Menace could not walk or charge, neither could it use Menace or Come Hither, or Quick Retreat. It could use triggers like Next Target or Reposition, because they are not actions. And it could be lured, since that is not the models' own action.

I would agree with all of this. Menece and Come Hither would be both Cast Actions and Movement Actions since they include movement effects specifically involving the Casting model. This is where its different from Lure, which is a Casting Action that only has movement effects that include the target model.

[Therril_83]

The only thing that still makes me frown a bit on this interpretation is the clarifications we've had regarding Strike Actions (it was mostly discussed together with Alps I believe). Not all actions that contains Strikes (like Charge or Mounted Combat) are Strike Actions. Only the actual (1) Strike is a Strike Action and takes wounds from Alps.

But there is nothing that is called a Move Action in the rules, so the same interpretation cannot be made here. So I can only see the options to either assume that Wyrd means General Move Action, or we can derive from Rattys earlier response in the thread like I did in my previous post. I think I'm leaning towards the latter.

[Thaarup]

But were is a movement Action defined as a action that includes some kind of movement effect for only the activated model? Lure does have a movement effect included and so does a lot of other actions...?

Would a action that moves another of you own teams models not be called a movement action..like a witchling handlers Words Written, why or why would that action not be called a movement Action?

I cant find any definition in the 1.5 rulebook about what a movement Action is exept that the general movement Actions are written under the topic of Movement (which include movement effects)?

[Ausplosions]

Because the Handler isn't moving or taking a movement action.

All it is doing is imposing a movement effect on another model.

It itself is NOT taking a movement action..

Edited February 4, 2013 by Ausplosions

[Lucidicide]

Pretty sure Movement Actions are just (1) Walk, (2) Charge, and (2) Jump. Everything else is just a Movement effect. That's what the rulebook indicates.

[Ausplosions]

Pretty sure Movement Actions are just (1) Walk, (2) Charge, and (2) Jump. Everything else is just a Movement effect. That's what the rulebook indicates.

Thats what I assumed...