Ring of Hotek

[Vampire1812]

Am I missing something here?

Do double 6's cause the caster to suffer 2 miscasts?

[Daeron]

Not to my understanding of the rules. You implicitly ask a very interesting question: what is the increased chance for a miscast because of this ring? I'll math-hammer the answer this week.
My guess is that it is roughly the double... but there's an interesting catch: the more dice you use, the bigger the chance. So for spells using more power dice, the window of "safe casting" may prove significantly reduced. For spells using fewer dice, the MR(3) might prove very effective at stopping a lot of harm.

[Vampire1812]

It says that it causes a miscast on double 1's and double 6's but you already miscast on double 6's. So I must be missing something here.

[Trax]

If the rule text said "any enemy that attempts to cast or target a spell on a unit within 6" of the bearer will suffer a miscast on a roll of double 1." [full stop], it would imply, that you'd only suffer a miscast on double 1s *instead* of double 6s since the AB ruling would supersede the BRB one. So, it's merely an extension from double 6s to double 6s and double 1s.

[Daeron]

That's my understanding as well. But I don't want to dismiss Vampire1812's doubts too quickly.

[Calisson]

French AB says double 1s "in addition to" double 6s.
So the miscast on 66 is just confirmed, not doubled.

[Trax]

I don't think translations will help us here, GW translations are prone to failure anyway. But I guess, the French makes the intention pretty clear. Anything else would be quite the surprise, quite frankly.

[Vampire1812]

Another needed clarification. I believe we are all saying the same thing but there are some that might interpret another way. Just throwing it out there.

[Trax]

Well, let's say I can see where you're coming from, but I think the Hotek ruling just supersedes (completely) the normal miscast ruling, hence, just a single miscast per double 6. Sadly I can't find a global limitation to one single miscast per spell - it's pretty intuitive, I guess, but no hard facts to support it here.

[Drasanil]

The rule says "a roll of double 1, as well as double 6." In other words, in addition to miscasting on double 6s [as is normal], they also miscast on double 1s.

Don't mean to be snide or anything, but after that chillblade thread, I'm starting to think some people are deliberately going out of their way to 'not understand' really simple lines of text. GW is by no means a perfect rules writer, but this hardly an example of that.

[Vampire1812]

The rule says "a roll of double 1, as well as double 6." In other words, in addition to miscasting on double 6s [as is normal], they also miscast on double 1s.

Don't mean to be snide or anything, but after that chillblade thread, I'm starting to think some people are deliberately going out of their way to 'not understand' really simple lines of text. GW is by no means a perfect rules writer, but this hardly an example of that.

Not at all. I just got home and re-read it also. Its intent follows the rule. Good to clarify I was listening to a podcast review and that's where the confusion came into play.

[Thatdave]

What about a roll that has a pair of 1's as well as a pair of 6's?

[Trax]

I know you were joking, but if a roll has two pair of 6's, it's still a single miscast, so that's hardly an issue^^

[Somerandomhero]

I'm lost here. I thought that double six resulted in irresistible and miscast. Double ones just miscast. Doesn't this ring stop enemy irrestible in range? Otherwise what is the diff? I mean doesn't it just mean with the ring double 6 mean fail fail not woohoo and fail?

[Trax]

Double 6 is still woohoo. The Ring doesn't kill this. But it grants you another fail without woohoo at double 1.

[Olderplayer]

Basically it means you double the risk of miscasting without doubling the risk of IF if the opponent throws 2 or 3 dice at a target. The wording of the rule is pretty clear that double 1's do not grant IF. If the opponent throws more than 3 dice then the risk of miscasting almost doubles, but not quite, because one could get double 1's and double 6's (very low chance) with 4 or more dice thrown at a spell. Notice that this applies to any target unit within 6" of the bearer of the Ring, which includes augments cast by the enemy wizard on enemy units within 6" of the bearer.

The real question is how valuable is this really? You gain MR3, which rarely saw play even though DE armies have had access to it for some time, and, at most, probably increase the chance of miscasting when the opponent targets a few or your units and once in combat some of his units but I am not sure a model with MR3 is one I want in or close to combat. Maybe running this in a lvl 4 bunker run just behind your big combat units but close enough for a miscast risk on enemy units in combat with your units makes the most sense.

[OldCrow]

I'm lost here. I thought that double six resulted in irresistible and miscast. Double ones just miscast. Doesn't this ring stop enemy irrestible in range? Otherwise what is the diff? I mean doesn't it just mean with the ring double 6 mean fail fail not woohoo and fail?

For clarity here - normally a roll of a double 6 is a miscast and an irresistible force. A roll of double 1s is nothing. With the ring the roll of a double 6 remains unchanged, the roll of double 1s now becomes a miscast.

[Trax]

What, MR didn't see play? Oh, it did. The higher miscast chance is just gravy since MR (3) costs 45p anyway and those 5p are well spent if alone for fearmongering. And why not put it on a (BSB?) Master. We have silly easy access to 1+AS, so no worries there.

[Somerandomhero]

Sorry for adding to confusion, I thought for some reason that double ones made you suffer miscast even without the ring. I'm not sure where that idea came from. Thanks for the clarification.

[martin25]

It says attempts to cast. So even a spell that does not go off can force a miscast.

[Daeron]

Correct, Martin.

And Somerandomhero: the idea could be a remnant of previous editions, where double 1's cause a miscast. There is the rule that rolling under 3 for a spell will fail, regardless of modifiers and cast values.

[marcopollo]

Massive MR are used in deathstar/mage bunkers in a defensive army. But what I would like to know is whether this MR is cumulative with other things like null stones etc.

[Thatdave]

"If a model has two sets of MR, the two do not combine, it uses the highest"

BRB, page 72

[marcopollo]

^^ thought so.

Too bad though. In my defensive army lists, I like to have MR 4 or 5. But, as suggested, a peg master might be a good place to put this.

[Daeron]

If the character is in a unit with a cauldron of blood, it gets a 6+ ward save from the cauldron. The MR(3) does stack with the regular ward save, adding up to a 3+ Ward Save against magic.