April 29, 2024, 06:40:44 AM

Author Topic: Sectarus clarification  (Read 13032 times)

Sausageman

  • Full Mage
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2013, 06:14:42 AM »
Quote from: "Tacullu64" post=7396
I am surprised we haven't got an official ruling from AW yet since that same question popped up on Facebook the day Sectarus was spoiled. Hopefully we will hear from them soon.

That may well have been me too   :blush:

Shad0w

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2934
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #16 on: February 13, 2013, 06:32:02 AM »
Quote from: "Shad0w" post=7402
Currently we have no way to get more than 1 spell on familiars.


Quote from: "piousflea" post=7359
The way I'm reading the card (based purely on the FB preview) is this:

1) Sectarus is a familiar. Therefore it can prepare a spell during the planning phase, just like a Huginn or Felella.

2) Sectarus is not a creature. Therefore it does not get an action marker and cannot cast spells using normal spellcasting mechanics. It is also not a Spawnpoint, so it cannot cast spells during the Deployment phase.

3) Sectarus has special wording that allows it to cast a spell as a free action. The way I am reading the card text is that after the Mage attacks and damages a creature with Sectarus, Sectarus can immediately cast the prepared spell on the creature as a free action. This would allow Sectarus to use the mana that it generates from Channeling.


1: Correct

2: Correct

3: This was how it worked in playtesting just like other familiars the mage used familiar mana first.
"Darth come prove to meet you are worthy of the fighting for your school in the arena and not just another scholar to be discarded like an worn out rag doll"


Quote: Shad0w the Arcmage

baronzaltor

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 1765
  • Banana Stickers 19
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #17 on: February 13, 2013, 05:40:05 PM »
Im really trying to like Sectarus, but its too gimmicky for my tastes and lacks versatility.  Ive been hoping for a dark familiar..but I still don't see my Warlock running this.

-Its outright dissolvable, limiting its reliability
-MUST spend an action to attack to use the spell, so its not a "free" action..just budget neutral.
-MUST hit with the attack to use the spell.  Defense, Daze, and Block all can waste your preparation
-MUST damage target to use spell.. Armor or just unlucky rolls prevent you from using your familiar
-Can ONLY cast spell on the target of your attack. Can't pressure mage and debuff his creatures at the same time, and meaning Guards can prevent you from casting what you need when you need.
-Does not get its own action marker.
-Can only cast curses, unlike say Fellalia who can cast curses, buffs, blocks, decoys, traps, etc.  This limits the books that have an interest to include it.  Typically I only run a few key counter curses (finite life, enfeeble, agony..things to answer specific situations.  not things to just spam)
-Doesn't let you use the 0-2 range of curses due to the fact that they must be in melee range to cast.
-Fellalia packs etherial damage, Huugin gets to peek under hidden enchantments... this one occupies your main hand slot where you could have equiped a vorpal sword for half the cost and double the pierce or a lash of hellfire for less mana, burn chance, reach and extra damage from a fireshaper ring.

No other familiar is so limited on its spell choices, AND its cast conditions, AND its target choices AND requires an action from the mage himself.  

Its not that its bad or anything... but its too focused for me.   I get that certain cards are made for certain structures, but familiar's should be a bit more open to me... they should be able to support multiple build types for a mage to consider.  This one only appeals to very specific curse-driven, melee combat books.

Koy

  • Jr. Mage
  • **
  • Posts: 89
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #18 on: February 13, 2013, 06:37:29 PM »
Im not sure I agree about it being budget neutral.  You are gaining the attack and it's subsequent damage plus the curse.  I think that has promise.  Hell if it draws some anti-equiment spells that's good news for my Lash.  :)

Tacullu64

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • Banana Stickers 10
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #19 on: February 13, 2013, 07:04:50 PM »
I like Sectarus. This might be the card that inspires me to finally play the warlock. I think it might be fun to play a warlock delivering curses via sword. Especially if we get some more good curses out this set.

piousflea

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • Banana Stickers 2
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #20 on: February 13, 2013, 10:25:13 PM »
Quote from: "baronzaltor" post=7467
Im really trying to like Sectarus, but its too gimmicky for my tastes and lacks versatility.  Ive been hoping for a dark familiar..but I still don't see my Warlock running this.


It's really more of a weapon than a Familiar. The Curse part is more of a bonus.

Compare the Sectarus to the Lash of Hellfire:
- Sectarus costs 1 more mana.
- Both have 4 attack dice
- Lash has Reach, while Sectarus has +1 Piercing.
- Lash inflicts Burn at random for no mana cost, while Sectarus inflicts precise Curses but you have to pay their cost

They are really two very similar weapons.

Tacullu64

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • Banana Stickers 10
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #21 on: February 13, 2013, 11:12:11 PM »
I like the lashes burn effect (except for the fact that I'm always on the receiving end of it), but another factor is the -2 flame abilities on the elemental cloak and dragonscale hauberk is much more effective against the lash.

piousflea

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • Banana Stickers 2
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2013, 04:46:58 PM »
The final card (@Bashcon) appears to say:

"Sectarus is a non-creature Familiar which can b used to cast only curse emchantments. If Sectarus is used to attack and damage a creature, it may immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action."

Koz

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 423
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #23 on: February 18, 2013, 08:46:45 AM »
Quote from: "piousflea" post=7581
The final card (@Bashcon) appears to say:

"Sectarus is a non-creature Familiar which can b used to cast only curse emchantments. If Sectarus is used to attack and damage a creature, it may immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action."


/thread

Shad0w

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2934
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #24 on: February 18, 2013, 09:24:55 AM »
I agree with Koz - I think this is now closed  ;)
"Darth come prove to meet you are worthy of the fighting for your school in the arena and not just another scholar to be discarded like an worn out rag doll"


Quote: Shad0w the Arcmage

oscarCalderon

  • New Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #25 on: March 04, 2013, 05:12:41 AM »
but, sectarus can use the mana generated to reveal the cursed emchantment?

Sausageman

  • Full Mage
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #26 on: March 04, 2013, 06:14:23 AM »
Quote from: "oscarCalderon" post=8584
but, sectarus can use the mana generated to reveal the cursed emchantment?
My understanding was no, that's 'revealing an enchantment', not casting it...  Sectarus just places it on an opponent, you, the caster, has to pay to reveal it.

baronzaltor

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 1765
  • Banana Stickers 19
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #27 on: March 04, 2013, 09:38:22 PM »
Quote from: "Sausageman" post=8587
Quote from: "oscarCalderon" post=8584
but, sectarus can use the mana generated to reveal the cursed emchantment?
My understanding was no, that's 'revealing an enchantment', not casting it...  Sectarus just places it on an opponent, you, the caster, has to pay to reveal it.


Correct, just like the Beastermaster familiar.

Sectarus only contributes to the facedown casting, to flip is up is out of your own pocket.   You can reduce the cost a little by using Ring of Curses.  (Which also reduces the casting cost of Sectarus itself, since its spell type is "curse" even as equipment)

Aylin

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • Banana Stickers 4
    • View Profile
Re: Sectarus clarification
« Reply #28 on: March 07, 2013, 03:19:27 PM »
Quote from: "baronzaltor" post=7467
Im really trying to like Sectarus, but its too gimmicky for my tastes and lacks versatility.  Ive been hoping for a dark familiar..but I still don't see my Warlock running this.

-Its outright dissolvable, limiting its reliability
-MUST spend an action to attack to use the spell, so its not a "free" action..just budget neutral.
-MUST hit with the attack to use the spell.  Defense, Daze, and Block all can waste your preparation
-MUST damage target to use spell.. Armor or just unlucky rolls prevent you from using your familiar
-Can ONLY cast spell on the target of your attack. Can't pressure mage and debuff his creatures at the same time, and meaning Guards can prevent you from casting what you need when you need.
-Does not get its own action marker.
-Can only cast curses, unlike say Fellalia who can cast curses, buffs, blocks, decoys, traps, etc.  This limits the books that have an interest to include it.  Typically I only run a few key counter curses (finite life, enfeeble, agony..things to answer specific situations.  not things to just spam)
-Doesn't let you use the 0-2 range of curses due to the fact that they must be in melee range to cast.
-Fellalia packs etherial damage, Huugin gets to peek under hidden enchantments... this one occupies your main hand slot where you could have equiped a vorpal sword for half the cost and double the pierce or a lash of hellfire for less mana, burn chance, reach and extra damage from a fireshaper ring.

No other familiar is so limited on its spell choices, AND its cast conditions, AND its target choices AND requires an action from the mage himself.  

Its not that its bad or anything... but its too focused for me.   I get that certain cards are made for certain structures, but familiar's should be a bit more open to me... they should be able to support multiple build types for a mage to consider.  This one only appeals to very specific curse-driven, melee combat books.


Think of it as a weapon that is in many cases more damaging than the Lash of Hellfire (isn't flame so can't have the dice reduced by flame resistance or flame immunity and it has piercing making it much better against a mage with the Elemental Cloak and/or Dragonscale Hauberk) and can cast curses for you on the side.