Does this Bright Order Spell completely ignore ALL the target's soak with a Comet and not only the armor soak?

This spell already does A LOT of damage since it's cost is small it can be powered up with the basic Bright Order Talent...

Soak value is defined as the sum of the Soak values of armour + shield.

Damage reduction is the sum of Toughness and Soak value.

Ignoring soak leave Damage reduction as Toughness.

Hmmm why then on some cards you have armour soak value and on some cards soak value?If its like you say you should have soak value and damage reduction on cards?

This is a good question.

Here are the references to soak in the Core rules:

p59 Core rules:

"The target’s Toughness, the soak value of its armour or equipment, or the effects of special abilities or talents may reduce the damage it takes. These numbers are combined to calculate the target’s damage reduction. The target’s damage reduction is subtracted from the attack’s damage potential."

This is clear enough. To recast as an equation:

Damage reduction = Toughness + soak value

soak value = sum of soak values from all sources

p61 Core rules:

"This beastman’s Soak Value is 6 (his Toughness 4 + Soak Value of 2 from his monster entry). The attack inflicts six wounds!"

In my opinion this is a misuse of the term Soak Value.

p74 Core rules:

"Pierce X: Weapons with this quality are designed to punch through the target’s protection. When struck by a piercing weapon, the target’s soak value is reduced by the weapon’s pierce rating, to a minimum soak value of zero."

Note that a target without a soak value still gets Damage reduction = Toughness.

p74 Core rules:

"Unreliable X: These weapons are often experimental or otherwise not to be trusted. If the weapon is a blackpowder weapon, it backfires or explodes if at least as many Chaos Star symbols are rolled equal to the item’s Unreliable rating. When this is triggered, the item inflicts wounds equal to its Unreliable rating to the wielder, bypassing the wielder’s soak value and Toughness."

This section correctly makes the distinction between soak value and Toughness.

p78 Core rules:

"The Old World is a dangerous place and armour is often all that stands between a warrior and quick death. Armour and shields aid you in two ways – making it harder to land an effective blow (adding to your defence rating) and absorbing the damage when they do (adding to soak value). The benefits from armour and shields stack. This means that wearing full plate armour and carrying a round shield provides a defence rating of 2 and a soak value of 6."

Again, the correct usage of soak value - seperate from Toughness.

So only once on p61 does the Core conflate soak with Toughness. Given the context of the other references, I believe this is an editorial oversight.

As for the cards - I can only speculate. Perhaps 'armour soak' is only the soak component provided by armour? Perhaps the author meant simply soak and merely sort ot emphasise that Toughness was not ignored.

Yea i get your point and i am thinking about it alot now tbh.I think there is no card with ability to ignore "damage reduction".Only armour soak and soak value.Maybe by soak value it means armour+buffs and some other effects.So for example,if priest cast Minor ward on 5 toughness soldier with full plate and tower shield his soak will be 12.And if spell that goes againts armour soak will ignore full plate+shield and if spell goes against soak value that it will ignore full plate+shield+minor ward,maybe?

Though this will mean there is no thing that can ignore toughness actually,as there is no card or ability that ignores damage reduction.Could it be that way?

Some spells (like combustion) do direct wounds - so no damage reduction.

Armor soak does indeed refer only to the portion of damage reduction governed by armor, and shields. Total soak value would be your Armor Soak plus any reduction given by other means; environment, abilities, talents, magical equipment, or effects.

Your Toughness is not affected unless something ignores Damage Reduction entirely.

Where is 'Armour soak' defined?.. It isn't in the core rules (I have the pdf, so I can word search).

Okay.Btw i checked all action cards from core set and adventurers toolkit and there is maybe one card that ignore everything.Dont have Winds of Magic thou.

Fresnel said:

There isn't anywhere that it is defined outright, you have to cobble it together from other sources. Reading the rules as written, however, there isn't much evidence to support any other conclusion.

Darrett said:

Your definition: The soak value provided by Armour and Shield.

Other possibility: The soak value provided by Armour.

Personally I think you are most likely correct to the author's intention.