Gurmash Battle orders

[Beldin]

If a battle order has been cast already in a turn:

1) can Gurmash, Orc Sargent cast the same battle order a second time and it double the effect of that battle order?
2) if the warlord is in the same zone with Gurmash, Orc Sargent and has an Ivarium Halberd out is he effected by both battle orders, as if he were a soldier?

I think I have read this all right but I am just checking my maths; am I correct in saying I can make my dwarf warlord have -6 tough and 2 armor this way?

[Puddnhead]

The Battle Orders ability says that the Warlord can use it once per round.  Gurmash says that he can use Battle orders.  There is no stipulation that I can find which prohibits them from both using it.  The way I read it you effectively copy the "Battle Orders" text from the Warlord card to Gurmash's card replacing "Warlord" with "Gurmash".

According to the above understanding, if you really feel it's a good use of resources, you could get Tough -6 and Armor +2.

I can see a different interpretation as well.  It is that perhaps Gurmash has access to the "Battle Orders" section of the Warlord's card and it should be read as "Once per turn, Gurmash or his controlling Warlord may...."

Of course I personally think it should be interpreted the first way.

[Beldin]

The Battle Orders ability says that the Warlord can use it once per round.  Gurmash says that he can use Battle orders.  There is no stipulation that I can find which prohibits them from both using it.  The way I read it you effectively copy the "Battle Orders" text from the Warlord card to Gurmash's card replacing "Warlord" with "Gurmash".

According to the above understanding, if you really feel it's a good use of resources, you could get Tough -6 and Armor +2.

I can see a different interpretation as well.  It is that perhaps Gurmash has access to the "Battle Orders" section of the Warlord's card and it should be read as "Once per turn, Gurmash or his controlling Warlord may...."

Of course I personally think it should be interpreted the first way.

This is the exact reason I was checking, due to the fact I reasoned both arguments in my head.

[Kaarin]

There's nothing preventing same battle orders stacking. You can even cast two Power Strikes or other incantations at same target without problems.

I would say that Gurmash isn't affected by restriction about number of times Warlord can cast Battle Orders. You may even Overextend Gurmash and cast Battle Orders three times in a round.

[RomeoXero]

 But the thing that's tripping people up is that the card states that Gurmash can cast his controlling warlords battle orders, and those orders are all once per round command spells that the warlord can cast. The question is can he cast the same one that the warlord has already cast. I think that according to the current wording, he CANNOT cast the same order that the warlord previously cast. But maybe that's just me

[RomeoXero]

The exact text is "Gurmash can only cast command spells, including the battle orders of his controlling warlord." So i get the ambiguity. I still think you can't do it though. But again maybe that's just me.

[Kharhaz]

1) Yes
2) Yes

"including the battle orders of his controlling warlord." is just a clarification of his ability so that battle orders are included as legal command spells for him to cast.

Gurmash does allow you to double up on a battle order in a round.

[Zuberi]

Interesting. Would you guys say that Gurmash has to pay 1 mana to cast the Battle Orders? You are correct that the wording on the Warlord is written in such a way as to suggest that only the Warlord is limited to once per round, but that same wording would also mean that he's the only one that would have to pay for them. As it doesn't say they cost 1 mana, just that the Warlord has to pay 1 in order to be able to cast them. I see no reason why one of these restrictions would apply to Gurmash and the other wouldn't.

I'm actually not sure which way is correct though. Do they both apply or does neither apply? I don't think I ever noticed or thought about it, and haven't had conversations (that I remember) regarding it. Being able to get the order repeatedly and for free would definitely be a big boost to having the familiar, but I'm very hesitant to accept that as the intention. As it is though, I see three possible interpretations here:

#1. He is simply triggering the Warlord's ability, and it is no different than if the Warlord had cast the spell. It still counts against the Warlord's limit and still costs 1 mana.

#2. He is copying the Warlord's ability and replaces the term "Warlord" with Gurmash". In which case he pays 1 mana and is prevented from casting it a 2nd time (via overextend or other shenanigans) himself, but the Mage could still cast it a 2nd time.

#3. He is casting the command spells without going through the ability at all. It doesn't cost him any mana and doesn't count against the Warlord's limit.

I don't think #2 is right, because I see no text to justify replacing "Warlord" with "Gurmash". But I do think this requires clarification.

[Puddnhead]

The way I see it, [mwcard=MWSTX2FFC07]Gurmash, Orc Seargeant[/mwcard]'s text is only limiting him to casting the battle orders of his controlling warlord instead of any other warlord's battle orders.  So someone running a bloodwave warlord cannot gain access to the anvil throne orders by running gurmash.  It's as if he's studied with his summoning warlord and has learned a few tricks of the trade for himself.  In which case, #2 (gurmash copies the ability and adds it to his card) is a completely valid interpretation.

In the other interpretation what the text of his ability is doing is linking Gurmash as an extention of the Warlord's stat card and allowing the quick spell to be cast from a different source using a different action marker.  If that's the case, though....which zone does the effect take place in?  Gurmash's or the Warlord's?

for reference:
[mwcard=WARLORDABILITYOUTLINE]Warlord Ability Card[/mwcard]

[Halewijn]

I can see the second interpretation but it would be very strange.

I agree with Beldin & Puddnhead. It can be cast twice and Gurmash has to pay for it.

[Arkdeniz]

It's as if he's studied with his summoning warlord and has learned a few tricks of the trade for himself.  In which case, #2 (gurmash copies the ability and adds it to his card) is a completely valid interpretation.

This has certainly always been my assumption. Thematically it works. Mechanically it works. So that's two ticks in its favour and none against.

And as far as Beldin's original question goes, picture it along the lines of:
Warlord: You guys stand firm! [battle order: On Guard!]
Gurmash: You heard the man! You don't dare move, and don't even think of running off or I'll personally find your sorry behind and whip two strips off it! [battle order: On Guard becomes doubled]

I know these forums tend to disregard theme in favour of RAW, but in this case I think the flavour and RAW work well together.