Jump to content


Photo

Runesmith And Spell Breaker Runes

runesmith

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Lord Anvilarm

Lord Anvilarm

    Dwarf Longbeard

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 776 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 01:48 AM

Hi All,

 

I want to make sure I understand the maximum number of Spellbreaker Runes a single Runesmith can take.

 

I believe the Runesmith can legally take one Spellbreaker Rune magic item and one magic item containing a Spellbreaker Rune and a Rune of Furnace for a total of two Spellbreakers.

 

You can't just take one magic item with two Spellbreakers on it because it becomes Spelleater Rune.

 

Do people agree with that?

 

Anvilarm



#2 St Hasselhoff

St Hasselhoff

    Dwarf Warrior

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 54 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 02:09 AM

No, because you can only have a single magic talisman, so no doubling up I'm afraid.

#3 Silvergrip

Silvergrip

    Dwarf Warrior

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 92 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 02:15 AM

If you were allowed to take a second talisman this would be entirely legit. Unfortunately you are only allowed one of each type of magic item, talismans included.



#4 Lord Anvilarm

Lord Anvilarm

    Dwarf Longbeard

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 776 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 02:35 AM

That is exactly what i was wondering. Thanks. So it is two Rune Smiths to get two Spellbreakers with one of them adding a Rune of the Furnace. 



#5 silverback

silverback

    Dwarf Warrior

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 94 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 04:33 AM

That is exactly what i was wondering. Thanks. So it is two Rune Smiths to get two Spellbreakers with one of them adding a Rune of the Furnace. 

 

Exactly



#6 Kinks

Kinks

    Dwarf Warrior

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 146 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 08:18 AM

It's not the two talisman's that is the problem here.

 

Its the 'Rule of Three'.  You cannot have more than three runes on one item.  In the rules for Rune of Spellbreaking, a third rune has no effect.



#7 marky

marky

    Dwarf Hammerer

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 300 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 08:51 AM

It's not the two talisman's that is the problem here.

 

Its the 'Rule of Three'.  You cannot have more than three runes on one item.  In the rules for Rune of Spellbreaking, a third rune has no effect.

 

and all the 2nd one does is give a 50% chance they will forget the spell



#8 Hoffa

Hoffa

    Dwarf Warrior

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 103 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 01:01 PM

Speaking of which, what happens when you spellbreak a bound spell, the language about the boundspell being destroyed on 6+ is no longer present. Does this means that boundspells are now destroyed on 4+ as well ?



#9 Thrundorin

Thrundorin

    Dwarf Longbeard

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 773 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 02:10 PM

Good qn Hoffa, I would talk it through with the opponant, my first though was to follow the miscast split.

 

If it is a bound spell item, the item is destroyed;

If it is a bound spell innate ability it just doesnt work this turn. 

 

given that it causes wizards to forget what they know for a while, I would assume that on a 4+ the spell is gone bound spell or otherwise. 



#10 Thanechuck

Thanechuck

    Dwarf Longbeard

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 448 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 03:12 PM

If you really want a second rune, a second runesmith is not that big an investment.  considering he attacks like a 2nd str 4 champion, give his unit armor piercing AND MR1  He's really a very good choice points willing.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: runesmith

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users