# Teclis/Book of Hoeth; Unbroken



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Too many times we have complaints of these two items (and often used together in higher points games), to such an extent that Houserules in tournaments ban their inclusion in army lists, or gimp the scores of the army so much that it's not worth taking them.

However, I've been having a mooch at the rules thanks to a passing comment in regards to their FAQ; http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1610147a_FAQ_HighElves_V1_4.pdf

The 1.4 states that they only generate Irresistable Force on any roll that is a double.

Seems minor. Until you read "Is a", instead of "Includes a".

The difference - they can only get a 2 Dice Irressitable Force - no more throwing 6 dice and hoping for a double to come up. Of course, they can throw 6 dice and hope to get a double 6, but that's not as fun is it?

It was apparently picked up on warseer as well, having a mooch on their forum as well, (it was that which reminded me of the conversation).

Opinions? Will you enforce what is apparently a typo or oversight?

All I can say is that I wish that GW would release an article alongside their FAQ to explain their decisions.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Playing it that way makes it worthless not unbroken. With the book of Hoeth you need to beat the casting value as have a double, making it so you can only roll 2 dice is stupid. You think a 100 point magic item is going to be that bad? I don't think so.

It's just loose wording in the FAQ and trying to enforce it that way makes you into 'That Guy'


----------



## increaso (Jun 5, 2010)

It's just badly worded.

It reads:

'… on any successful casting roll which is a double, however it will only be considered a miscast if the roll includes a double six.'

The 'includes a' bit makes no sense if the 'is a' is supposed to impose some sort of limitation on the amount of dice you roll.

[I don't play fantasy so ignore me if i've got the wrong end of the stick, but it just seems like a wording issue]


----------



## Dave T Hobbit (Dec 3, 2009)

increaso said:


> [I don't play fantasy so ignore me if i've got the wrong end of the stick, but it just seems like a wording issue]


Seems like a sound point to me.

Either the "is a" means "includes a" or the "includes a" means "is a".

Why oh why cannot GW write their rules using symbolic logic? (This question is rhetorical; GW should not be allowed to bring fluffiness to symbolic logic.)


----------



## increaso (Jun 5, 2010)

Having had a look at the 8th edition rulebook and the HE 7th edition book (but unfortunately no access to 7th edition rulebook to see what the position was as to miscasts) it appears that the faq intended to simply clarify that the 'miscast' event is attached to rolling double sixes rather than attached to gaining irresistable force.

Without the faq it is possible to otherwise interpret the 'Irresistable Force' event as being the trigger for a miscast rather than the rolling of two sixes. This would put a huge drawback on the item in question.

[Is aware that he is probably just saying what everyone already knows]


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

GW not fool proofing their material.

I think Aramoro has the right idea.


----------

