Jump to content

Familiars/Holy Symbols and Counter Spell


Recommended Posts

Now that Familiars and Holy Symbol allow a caster to retain a failed spell, how does this work when Counter Spelled?

 

It is not fair to Counter Spell (losing CS due to success) causing a complete failure of the Attack Spell only to have the successfully countered spell re-cast next turn due to Familiar, and me now with no Counter Spell :upside: !

 

I could see rataining the Attack spell if the spell would have missed/failed with out the -6 CP, but that seems like extra record keeping that would slow play.

 

Perhaps, Counter Spell should just trump Familiars and Holy Symbols.

 

Cheers,

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I like the way it currently works.

 

Keep in mind that for the most part things that cause damage are cheap, and things that prevent or heal it are expensive.

Mav is cheaper than DV.

Ice shard is cheaper than Cure 2.

The exception to this has always been Counter spell. A very cheap, very easy to use defensive spell that can really nerf spells that cost 3 times as much. Now there is at least an item that brings some some counters against Counter Spell.

 

Also keep in mind that Counter Spell doens't completely stop a spell. It only reduces the casting model's CP by 6. So they may still affect a model, but you have severly increased the chances of most models coming out unharmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in the previous thread, I'm all for counterspelling preventing the retention of a spell.

 

Yes counterspell can nerf spells 3 time the cost, but now that most spells are dirt cheap counterspell is usually much closer in cost to the spell being cast than further away. Also remember that counterspell is not automatic, I have to cast it, and you still have to fail your casting check (even with -6 a 10 always succeeds).

 

If you don't want your spells to be 'nerfed' then play smart and don't cast them within range of Mages that have defensive magic and caster level 2. A good player will bait you into using your counterspells on something dangerous (a 12 point Fireball) and then let you have it once you are out of counterspells with his chain lightning.

 

Having the familiar as back up simply provides a crutch for weak players or army builds and removes some of the tactics involved in the game. With a familiar I can now take a couple Ice Storms, a familiar, and just keep pounding away until you run out of counterspells. I don't think Familiars really needed to go back to giving spell retention in the first place, especially with Innate(bolt) on Mages providing a back up for when you run out of spells or if you lose a spell.

 

Your argument is why should a 10 point spell be able to kill off a 30 point one.

 

My argument is why should a 15 point familiar not only grant you better casting abilities, and the ability to retain miscast spells, but also prevent all of my 10 point counterspells from removing a spell from your arsenal if you are desperate enough to cast it around one of my spellcasters, if I successfully make my CP check, and if you fail your caster check with the imposed penalty (those are big IFs).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd agree with you SE if it wasn't for two important details:

1) Counter Spell is cast on your enemys activation. This is hugely valuable

2) Most mages don't get to repeatedly try to cast spells until they succeed. Even with familiar. Battles only last so long and mages often can't cast a spell during their first activation (due to range) and will very often get killed before the battle ends.

 

True counter spell doesn't prevent the spell from being cast again, but it does mean you waste one of the enemys preciously few Cast Spell Actions. Easily worth 10 points in my book.

 

If battles lasted forever and mages weren't prone to dying I'd agree, but as it is most mages will only have spell casting chances 3-4 times in a battle. Having a mage waste one of these chances is not as much wasting the X point spell he was trying to cast as it is wasting 1/4th to 1/3rd of the total points invested in the mage model. Remember a lot of the spell casting cost is tied up in the mage model itself. I view counter spell as cutting heavily into those points when you prevent an enemy caster from casting during a round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in the previous thread, I'm all for counterspelling preventing the retention of a spell.

 

Yes counterspell can nerf spells 3 time the cost, but now that most spells are dirt cheap counterspell is usually much closer in cost to the spell being cast than further away. Also remember that counterspell is not automatic, I have to cast it, and you still have to fail your casting check (even with -6 a 10 always succeeds).

 

If you don't want your spells to be 'nerfed' then play smart and don't cast them within range of Mages that have defensive magic and caster level 2. A good player will bait you into using your counterspells on something dangerous (a 12 point Fireball) and then let you have it once you are out of counterspells with his chain lightning.

 

Having the familiar as back up simply provides a crutch for weak players or army builds and removes some of the tactics involved in the game. With a familiar I can now take a couple Ice Storms, a familiar, and just keep pounding away until you run out of counterspells. I don't think Familiars really needed to go back to giving spell retention in the first place, especially with Innate(bolt) on Mages providing a back up for when you run out of spells or if you lose a spell.

 

Your argument is why should a 10 point spell be able to kill off a 30 point one.

 

My argument is why should a 15 point familiar not only grant you better casting abilities, and the ability to retain miscast spells, but also prevent all of my 10 point counterspells from removing a spell from your arsenal if you are desperate enough to cast it around one of my spellcasters, if I successfully make my CP check, and if you fail your caster check with the imposed penalty (those are big IFs).

 

SE I unfortunately disagree with everything you have said. Then again I tend to roll well, and I play Darkspawn.

 

First I have never played a game, so far, where all of my spells have a chance to be played. As I said in another post, "Counterspell is a delaying tactic." You are trying to delay your opponent long enough to get a combat monster in to b2b to kill the mage. I did this in my last game. Worked great! BTW are you playing games where there are ten mages running around? I have yet to see a game top 3 casters on a side.

 

Next Familiars are in no way a crutch for a weak player/army. Do not confuse your prefrence for someone else's skill. You may have become a better through not using these casting upgrades, but your experience is not global.

 

I can understand that it seems like Counterspell got nerfed but on the otherhand I think that it balanced out a tendency to towards a "Counterspell Caddy". (Yes Vejlin Dispel Scroll Caddies are still alive and well in the land of WFB.)

 

Inasmuch as Counterspells may not remove spells from your opponents arsenal, they do use up your opponent's valuable casting action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sticking with Psyberwolfe1 and Vejlin on this one.

 

Yes, counterspell does lose a little power that it once had IF your opponent takes a familiar. Don't forget that familiars cost points, and they cost MORE than counterspell.

 

Even if I KNOW my opponent is taking a familiar(s), I will still put a counterspell on every single mage in my army that can take it. Simply because it is still a great spell that can literally change the tide of battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you also have to remember is that my Mage might not have to spend an activation to cast defensively but he has to drop 2 spell slots and 10 points to do so. Many mages in the game are 2/6-8, and putting 1-2 counterspells on them is a huge investment, especially since many of the same Mages are CP 5-6. If Islap 2 counterspells on a model it eats up a hell of alot of their spellcasting ability.

 

The idea that counterspelled spells are lost is merely something that I prefer. I might also prefer counterspell to be dropped to a level 1 spell, or stay a level 2 and be dropped in points cost, or to have varying degrees of counterspell available for each caster level (1-3).

 

@psyberwolfe1: I can easily field 6+ Mages in a 1000 point Necroplis army without blinking any eye (Railor + Malek x 3 supported with Skeletons)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In most aspects of the game, Counter Spell works exactly the same as it did before. The only way that the function of the spell changes is when the offensive mage buys an upgrade. An upgrade that is meant to make them more offensively powerful.

 

Why can't offensive mages be allowed to purchase upgrades that will help them lessen the affects of the nearly unstopable counterspells?

 

Before suggesting that counterspell be lowered in grade or price, I would suggest playing with it and charging yourself 15 points for itor take it at a grade 3. Then when it stops a chainlightning after hitting one model, does the same for a firestorm that was directly over your largest troop, or holds off that 4 points of damage from Ice Storm hitting your 150+ point Warlord; tell me that it's too expensive.

10 points to delay 4! points of damage to a model might be the greatest deal in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before suggesting that counterspell be lowered in grade or price, I would suggest playing with it and charging yourself 15 points for itor take it at a grade 3. Then when it stops a chainlightning after hitting one model, does the same for a firestorm that was directly over your largest troop, or holds off that 4 points of damage from Ice Storm hitting your 150+ point Warlord; tell me that it's too expensive.

10 points to delay 4! points of damage to a model might be the greatest deal in the game.

 

Nothing personal, but if you take a huge enough risk to cast one of your hefty spells in an area where I have a Mage with a counterspell you deserve to lose that spell.

 

I'm more suggesting that we see a variation in counterspells (a level 1,2 and 3 version) than a dirict drop in the price, I think 10 points is probably right. But as it stand, with only one version of counterspell, and with that version merely causing a delay against casters with familiars (and lets face it many casters will be taking a familiar) I can see it being appropriate for the spell level to drop to 1. Just a thought, i'm not saying it as a knee jerk reaction, but it is worth trying out.

 

Like I said, I'm not screaming bloody murder over this whole thing.

 

The biggest thing I have expressed to Gus about the changes to Mages (drop in points, and addition of Innate(Bolt)) is that while I love how much better they have gotten, the designers need to be careful to have not gone too far and have made them too dominant. I think as it stand they are pretty much on the money having used multiple Mages (3+) in all the games I've played thus far with RC08. Still, balance is why i'm really not all that happy with the idea of familiars going back to their retention of miscast spells, I just don't think it is needed. We're talking about games that last 3-5 turns, most mages will bring 2-4 spells anyway and have their innate(bolt) as back-up if they run out, so they will never run out of things to do in the game, whether they lose a spell or not.

 

Truthfully this is more about familiars than it is about counterspells in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before suggesting that counterspell be lowered in grade or price, I would suggest playing with it and charging yourself 15 points for itor take it at a grade 3. Then when it stops a chainlightning after hitting one model, does the same for a firestorm that was directly over your largest troop, or holds off that 4 points of damage from Ice Storm hitting your 150+ point Warlord; tell me that it's too expensive.

10 points to delay 4! points of damage to a model might be the greatest deal in the game.

 

Nothing personal, but if you take a huge enough risk to cast one of your hefty spells in an area where I have a Mage with a counterspell you deserve to lose that spell.

 

...snip...

 

What you just said with that single statement is that Counter Spell in it's current form is so powerful that if I even attempt to cast a spell at a model within 6 inches of an opponent mage, whether I have a familiar or not, I deserve to lose the spell because of the severe tactical error I made...

Yet you still think there shouldn't be an item that is more expensive than the spell to help lessen the affects...

 

 

If you think the problem is with Familiars alone, that's another issue.

 

If you look at all of the powerful offensive items in the game they have come down in cost. Familiars, instead of being decreased in price have regained an ability they had in the original rules, effectively making them more valuable.

Deadly things became a better deal. Familiars got the same buff as the Avenger or Magical ranged weapons in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[snip]

Truthfully this is more about familiars than it is about counterspells in my mind.

 

Absolutely, I don't think that familiars need the retain failed spells function either, though, my elves will happily take advantage of the fact. I take the familiars for the added CP anyway. I would prefer that Counter Spell trump Familiars/Holy Symbols, and could see increasing the cost of Counter Spell 5 pts or so to silence the whinging. I LIKE the idea of a 1st level Counter Spell that give, say, a -3 CP ::D:

 

My group doesn't play tourney-type games that are limited to 5 turns or so, we tend to play 2-on-2 good guys v. bad to the death cage matches. Most games run 10+ turns on big 6'x10' tables with TONS of terrain. The winner is usually the player that manages their spells and uses them 'at the correct time' :devil: . The way we tend to play, spells are important and you bring a Mage if only to have a Counter Spell near your uber-melee guy. I tend to 'load my casters for bear' every game and most games my casters are 'out' by the time things are over, reduced to throwing themselves into combat to add the support bonus!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at all of the powerful offensive items in the game they have come down in cost. Familiars, instead of being decreased in price have regained an ability they had in the original rules, effectively making them more valuable.

Deadly things became a better deal. Familiars got the same buff as the Avenger or Magical ranged weapons in my opinion.

 

All of the powerful items got cheaper because they were overpriced, not simply to make them better, the changes were made (like the base cost of mages dropping and innate(bolt) being added) to make the various models and abilities more balanced and cost effective.

 

There are also plenty of things that didn't change in price.

 

The change to familiars was made, along with with the other changes to mages to make taking a Mage model more desirable.

 

At the same time they make taking counterspell less desirable and cost effective.

 

Funny how you discuss the decrease in cost of all the spells and equipment when most of those pieces of equipment have stayed the same or gotten better, yet despite the clear decrease in effectiveness of counterspells against mages employing a familair you take offense to my suggestion that maybe counterspell should be a Level 1 Mage spell, or maybe is should cost less.

 

Truthfully, it isn't the 10 points that worries me, it is the 2 spells slots. On a 2/6 or 2/8 Mage if I want to buy 2 counterspells I give up a huge amount of my offensive ability to do so. And as it stand I don't believe the offensive abilities I give up are balanced by the defensive abilites I gain with my investment. If counterspell was a level 1 spell it wouldn't mind the fact that a familiar only causes it to be delayed.

 

RE: Counterspell being powerful

 

1) I have to invest in a Mage 2/x just to buy the spell

 

2) I have to give up 2 spell slots just to take the spell

 

3) I have to hope you cast a spell around my caster to use the spell

 

4) I have to make my caster check in order for the spell to be useful

 

5) The spell merely hinders you casting attempt, it doesn't cancel your spell automatically

 

6) I have to spend 10 points to buy the spell

 

And now you want all my effort and points cost to simply delay my chance at a dispel simply because you invested a mere 15 points in a gimmecky piece of kit that lets a player be tactically inept and unimaginative (there are plenty of ways to prevent me from using my counterspell including forcing me to use my defensive action otherwise, using multiple casters in the same troop, or duping me into burning my counterspells on lesser spells earlier in the game).

 

What you just said with that single statement is that Counter Spell in it's current form is so powerful that if I even attempt to cast a spell at a model within 6 inches of an opponent mage, whether I have a familiar or not, I deserve to lose the spell because of the severe tactical error I made...

Yet you still think there shouldn't be an item that is more expensive than the spell to help lessen the affects.

 

Yes, deserve to lose a spell if:

 

1) You take the risk and cast within 6 inches of my caster

 

and

 

2) I have a counterspell available to cast

 

and

 

3) I make my caster check

 

and

 

4) You fail your caster check (even with your familiars +1 CP bonus)

 

If you were paying 15 points just to be able to negate the counterspell I would have no problems, but you get a whole lot more than that for your 15 point investment.

 

Oh, and your familiar already lessen the affects of my counterspell by giving you a +1 to your CP.

 

 

Anyway, at this point we're beating a dead horse, I think the arguments are out there, and we can only wait and see what sort of comments might be made regarding them.

 

Even:

Amulet of Spell Dueling (5 points): Spells counterspell by the casting wizard gain +1 to their caster checks and cannot be retained by an enemy wizards familaiar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My group doesn't play tourney-type games that are limited to 5 turns or so, we tend to play 2-on-2 good guys v. bad to the death cage matches. Most games run 10+ turns on big 6'x10' tables with TONS of terrain. The winner is usually the player that manages their spells and uses them 'at the correct time' :devil: . The way we tend to play, spells are important and you bring a Mage if only to have a Counter Spell near your uber-melee guy. I tend to 'load my casters for bear' every game and most games my casters are 'out' by the time things are over, reduced to throwing themselves into combat to add the support bonus!

 

Sounds like fun ::): , but we can't really take all the scenarios that people like to play into consideration when pointing. If the game is play tested with games that take 5-6 turns then yes it's inevitable that familiar will be MUCH more useful in games spanning twice the number of turns.

 

I think it would be an error to balance the game according to scenarios that most people don't play. If Warlord is intended to be played on a 4x4 table over 6 turns then that's the context it should be balanced in.

 

Think I'll try one of your type scenarios one day though, sounds like a fun scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...