Couple of three questions

Quote :

The prayer 'Armour of Righteousness'. The priest has an armour save of 2+ which replaces his normal armour save. In addition, he causes Fear in his enemies and is therefore immune to Fear himself.

1) So if the priest charges a model and then casts this in the shooting/magic phase, the Fear takes effect right away and the charged model must pass a fear test or require 6's to hit. I was thinking he wasn't actually causing Fear when he charged (i.e. in the charging phase with it being before the magic phase). I guess the intent is that he should still cause Fear even if he casts after charging?

2) Just remembered this one. Is a model with Horrible Scars (after battle roll) immune to Fear as well as causing it?

Quote :

The chaos ritual 'Visions of Torment'. This spell has a range of 6" and must be cast on the closest enemy model. If the chaos mage is in hand-to-hand combat, he must chose his target from those in base contact with him. The affected model is immediately stunned. If the model cannot be stunned it is knocked down instead.

3) If the model he is fighting has more than one wound, does it still get stunned? If so can it get OOA'd in the combat round automatically?

Sorry if any of these should be obvious, I suspect at least #1 should be obvious

Hi Darkfury,

1) Rules as written, the priest will not cause a fear test on the charge. The test is made when the charge is declared and the priest isn't fear-causing at that point. It would be a sensible house rule though but it's never come up in my group.

2) Horrible scars makes the model fear-causing, which in turn makes it immune to fear.

3) Yes, the model will be stunned regardless of how many wounds it has remaining. The spell of doom is similar to this, you roll on the injury table even if the target has wounds remaining. An OOA result there means the model is taken out as normal.

I hope this helps!

Thanks a lot MasterSpark, it does indeed help.

I will chat to my opponent about the Armor spell and we can house rule it one way or the other.

I think I had assumed horrible scars didnt make you Fear immune because the previous item on the serious injuries chart was 'Hardened' making them Fear immune but not Fear causing, but thats just a separate possibility so not relevant (and twice as likely).

Good to know about the wounds, that could be very handy. Or very annoying, depending on which side you are on. But good for additional tactics.

Actually that Visions of Torment seems silly overpowered then doesn't it? That means if my opponent has a minotaur with say four wounds, as long as I can roll the spells difficulty check (alright thats a tricky 10), as long as I have a model in B2B (either myself or another one) I can just take it auto OOA (as it's stunned)?

Or I have to roll for injury, and ignore anything but a 5 or 6 as the model is already stunned?
And on a 1 to 4 on the injury he doesn't lose any wounds?

Sorry if I am complicating what should be very simple.

Nope, you're entirely right. The minotaur will go out of action immediately because it is stunned. It's potentially very powerful. The defence against it is the difficulty of the spell, the short range and that the wizard must cast it against the closest enemy model. Having a helmet on should also work, giving you a 50% chance of turning it into a knocked down result instead which is less serious. Undead models are also protected in the same way as they can't be stunned.

Thanks again. At least it's clear (and my oppo can start buying helmets!).

The helmet thing might be a grey area depending on how you read the rules on it. The spell says that the target is immediately stunned while helmets give you a save against being stunned. Immediately stunned might imply bypassing anything that could stop it, although I think it should have said automatically stunned instead if that was the case. Let's see if others will weigh in on this with other answers. It'll be worth it to talk it over with the guys in your group as well.

Personally I think that making helmets effective against visions of torment is a good thing. It's an evil, evil spell.

I'd definitely bring in a vote for Helmets working against Vision of Torment; unless the spell ignores saves from Helmets (like a 3-4 Mace crit), I don't see anything in the rules that would bypass it. Same goes for Spell of Doom.

Concerning the Armour of Righteousness: You do not cause fear on your charge, since, as you say, the magic phase is after the movement phase. It does however work when the enemy attempts to charge you in the following turn.

Im the one its being used against, and i don't think helmets should be relevant.

A helmet saves you from something twatting you round the head, not a spell, that makes no sense.

You can feel free to make a house-rule, but RAW the helmet will give you a save against the stunning. Perhaps the extra mass around the brain gives the helmet-wearer a *chance* to *slightly* mitigate the amount of trouble he is in. Remember, being knocked down in melee is only slightly better than being stunned.

Also, the 10 to cast sounds difficult now, but with e.g. Sorcery, Mind Focus, Magical Aptitude and a Familiar, it becomes a lot easier to pull off.

qboid wrote:

Im the one its being used against, and i don't think helmets should be relevant.

A helmet saves you from something twatting you round the head, not a spell, that makes no sense.

Agreed, Vision of Torment is a vision not a hit on the head. And while I realise this is a fluff interpretation (not a RAW), I feel that this is the spirit which is intended. As said earlier, the spell is already hard to cast, has a short range and must be cast at the closest enemy. The spell caster is taking quite a risk getting up close and personal with a minotaur just to get a 16.6% chance to stun it.

Spells are those special things, like skills, that make heroes, heroes; they should be powerful.

Lord 0 wrote:

You can feel free to make a house-rule, but RAW the helmet will give you a save against the stunning. Perhaps the extra mass around the brain gives the helmet-wearer a *chance* to *slightly* mitigate the amount of trouble he is in. Remember, being knocked down in melee is only slightly better than being stunned.

Also, the 10 to cast sounds difficult now, but with e.g. Sorcery, Mind Focus, Magical Aptitude and a Familiar, it becomes a lot easier to pull off.

Yes, but by then the sorcerer has gone through lots of effort and luck to achieve these skills. That should be rewarded. How many scenarios does the sorcerer need to play to get these skills v.s. how many scenarios the opposing warband needs to play to afford a minotaur (or achieve a hero of similar power)? All in all, feels balanced to me.

If you cannot see the 'fluff' reason for Helmets to apply, try this one, suggested by NoisyAssassin in this thread:

NoisyAssassin wrote:

If you want a fluff justification, think of it as, "Wizard casts the spell and falls into a swoon from loss of blood. On the way down, he may hit his head on the pavement, turning the knock down into a stun. The helmet has a chance to protect his head if this happens."

(Regarding the spell Dark Blood, where you must test for the sorcerer's injury)

While I do not want to repeat my arguments for the Helmet to provide a save in this situation as well, I will try to come up with a fluff explanation in the same area.

This is the fluff description of Vision of Torment:

Mordheim Rulebook p. 43 wrote:

The Chaos Mage summons horrible visions of the realm of Chaos, causing his enemy to recoil in utter horror.

Could one imagine that these visions cause the victim to fall over and hit his head so hard, that he would become stunned, and would that not be excactly what a Helmet could protect you from?

Yeah, those are good ones! Thanks!

In any case, it comes down, as always, to what each of us finds fun. I find the spell's difficulty and circumstances justifies it's power.