It seems perfectly legal to me, but it does sound like it shouldn't be and/or is an abuse of rules:
Spells that affect characters and boost their stats (such as 'the bear's anger') can be cast by two seperate wizards on the same target, giving them +6 attacks +4 Strength and +2 toughness, fairly out of control.
Is this right? My support is that the rulebook under magic states that if 2 spells are cast on the same target and contradict one another, then the most recent takes precedent. Since these aren't contridictory, they should still both apply?
Spells that affect characters and boost their stats (such as 'the bear's anger') can be cast by two seperate wizards on the same target, giving them +6 attacks +4 Strength and +2 toughness, fairly out of control.
Is this right? My support is that the rulebook under magic states that if 2 spells are cast on the same target and contradict one another, then the most recent takes precedent. Since these aren't contridictory, they should still both apply?