Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yes and no.

I feel a little more comfortable commenting on the Heart because if they meant RAW the wounds caused by KB which doesn't cause wounds (unless it fails), they just wasted ink writing that and confused everyone. That's like saying it can block the Wounds caused by goblin kisses. So then you're like what, goblins have lips?

The moment you say "You know what they ere trying to say" you have entered RAI territory and the problem is that you never actually DO know what they were trying to say.

You can know with in reasonable doubt. Unless it is 100% provable knowledge you are after in which case that argument holds just as true for RaW as it does for RaI.

Everybody here who is arguing that BotWD gives a 2+ ward save against magical killing blows or even black horror believes that what they KNOW what the author of the BotWD meant when they said "wounds caused by spells, magic items or magic attacks" and they believe that what he was trying to say was "2+ ward against ANY magic effect that touches them"

Or we think that they mean that as all saves are taken against wounds that the use of the wounds wording makes total sense and KB and BH over ride the need for wounds to occur for BotWD just as they do for normal saves. The issue with your wording is that it would imply they would get Ward Saves against Dwellers, Purple Sun etc and would cause arguments there and there could even be argued that you would get the 2+ save against debuff spells too.

That is the issue it would have been difficult to word the save to include all damage from the given sources without creating further confusion. Also check the Fireborn rule and see how consistent the wounds are used for every ward save where they are narrowing the sources of damage.

"Or we think that they mean that as all saves are taken against wounds"
Apart from when you take ward saves against BH, which explicitly doesnt cause wounds.

Oh wait, your argument is flawed.

The Heart actually solves the problem as does Malekith's item from the DE book. The question at hand is does KB cause an unsaved wound and Heart states that any Usaved Wounds caused by KB, HKB, or MWs are negated on a dice roll. The key in both and Malekith and Tyrions items is they both call out the Unsaved Wounds from KB. The items dont say negates KB on X but says that it negates Unsaved Wounds caused by KB on X. Whether you consider the item weird or not the only part that is important is that both these items demonstrate that KB, etc. cause Unsaved Wounds. Banner of World Cheese gives you a +2 ward against them.

No, they do not answer the question - it negates any wounds caused, but if no wounds are caused it has no effect whatsoever. It is an assumption that you are making.

Ive sighted 2 different sources that state the KB causes an Unsaved Wound. How do you get an Unsaved Wound? You fail to save it. What caused said Wound? Killing Blow. So in order to get an unsaved wound you have to fail a save as stated by the big rule book. Your argument is that you believe Slay outright on KB doesnt cause any wounds. Now ive demonstrated in two different places and two different books that have come out in the past 5 monthes that KB causes Unsaved Wounds which are only caused if you fail a save. Like i said before on Malekith in DE and Tyrion in HE, it doesnt state if negates KB but instead it negates ANY UNSAVED WOUNDS caused by KB. The burden on your argument is now to prove that slay outright doesnt cause any wounds. As one of the previous posters pointed out there are numerous places that use the word slay but slay is not a rule. Please cite a source that states KB doesnt cause wounds. Ive cited two different places that states to the contrary.

The rule could offer protection against unsaved wounds from flying too, that would not mean that flying caused wounds.
Again, can someone copy the actual ttext snippet please.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is no rule which states that KB causes wounds.A rule negating wounds does not etate that wounds were caused.
The Killing Blow rule would have to state (like every effect which causes wounds does) that it causes wounds.
Do other effects which happen on a to wound roll cause wounds? Apart from the basic to wound process, no.
In a permissive ruleset, you don't get to just add things - KB doesn't cause wounds because it doesn't state that it causes wounds.

The argument has nothing to do with protection from flying or goblin kisses. Demonstrate and cite a source that says KB doesnt cause a wound on a 6. KB states that on a wound roll of 6 it slays a model outright. It doesnt state that the wound roll of a 6 is no longer a wound. The argument is that on a 6 KB causes no wound but slays a model. The attempt is to confer slay outright as being similar to Dwellers or Final Transmutation where it just removes a model. There is no rule for slay outright in the rule book but slay is used numerous time. The point you need to now prove has nothing to do with protection from anything but that KB doesnt cause a wound. Pg 55 in the HE book under Tyrion specifically calls out Unsaved wounds caused by KB and Malekith's Armor in the DE book does the same. Also if you go and look at the To Wound chart in the big rule book any roll of a 6 causes a wound, KB is just an added affect that happens on a wound roll of a 6. Now please cite a source to the contrary that states that KB removes a model from play or doesnt cause any wounds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niteware wrote:
The rule could offer protection against unsaved wounds from flying too, that would not mean that flying caused wounds.
Again, can someone copy the actual ttext snippet please.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is no rule which states that KB causes wounds.A rule negating wounds does not etate that wounds were caused.
The Killing Blow rule would have to state (like every effect which causes wounds does) that it causes wounds.
Do other effects which happen on a to wound roll cause wounds? Apart from the basic to wound process, no.
In a permissive ruleset, you don't get to just add things - KB doesn't cause wounds because it doesn't state that it causes wounds.

You make my argument. If i can negate a WOUND you caused that i can also make a savings throw against the WOUND you caused. Thats what the argument is about, I dont care that the Heart negates the Wound, I care that the Heart states you caused a WOUND which youve aknowledge now twice. The Banner says i get ward against wounds caused and youve caused a wound on a 6 with KB. And yet again the Heart does indeed state it negates UNSAVED WOUNDS from KILLING BLOW. The argument isnt about Negating but about it being an WOUND. On any to wound roll of a 6 a wound happens, but on a 6 KB also happens. Look at the To Wound Chart, a roll of a 6 causes a wound which also proves that KB causes a wound.
Now please cite some form of evidence that KB causes no wound on a roll of a 6. The wound chart says otherwise as do both the HE and DE books. Im done posting til someone can actually demonstrate something to the contrary cause I now have a chart that shows all 6's cause wounds as well.

UncleGlock wrote:
The argument has nothing to do with protection from flying or goblin kisses. Demonstrate and cite a source that says KB doesnt cause a wound on a 6. KB states that on a wound roll of 6 it slays a model outright. It doesnt state that the wound roll of a 6 is no longer a wound. The argument is that on a 6 KB causes no wound but slays a model. The attempt is to confer slay outright as being similar to Dwellers or Final Transmutation where it just removes a model. There is no rule for slay outright in the rule book but slay is used numerous time. The point you need to now prove has nothing to do with protection from anything but that KB doesnt cause a wound. Pg 55 in the HE book under Tyrion specifically calls out Unsaved wounds caused by KB and Malekith's Armor in the DE book does the same. Also if you go and look at the To Wound chart in the big rule book any roll of a 6 causes a wound, KB is just an added affect that happens on a wound roll of a 6. Now please cite a source to the contrary that states that KB removes a model from play or doesnt cause any wounds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niteware wrote:
The rule could offer protection against unsaved wounds from flying too, that would not mean that flying caused wounds.
Again, can someone copy the actual ttext snippet please.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is no rule which states that KB causes wounds.A rule negating wounds does not etate that wounds were caused.
The Killing Blow rule would have to state (like every effect which causes wounds does) that it causes wounds.
Do other effects which happen on a to wound roll cause wounds? Apart from the basic to wound process, no.
In a permissive ruleset, you don't get to just add things - KB doesn't cause wounds because it doesn't state that it causes wounds.

You make my argument. If i can negate a WOUND you caused that i can also make a savings throw against the WOUND you caused. Thats what the argument is about, I dont care that the Heart negates the Wound, I care that the Heart states you caused a WOUND which youve aknowledge now twice. The Banner says i get ward against wounds caused and youve caused a wound on a 6 with KB. And yet again the Heart does indeed state it negates UNSAVED WOUNDS from KILLING BLOW. The argument isnt about Negating but about it being an WOUND. On any to wound roll of a 6 a wound happens, but on a 6 KB also happens. Look at the To Wound Chart, a roll of a 6 causes a wound which also proves that KB causes a wound.
Now please cite some form of evidence that KB causes no wound on a roll of a 6. The wound chart says otherwise as do both the HE and DE books. Im done posting til someone can actually demonstrate something to the contrary cause I now have a chart that shows all 6's cause wounds as well.

I really, really have not acknowledged any wounds from KB. In fact, the opposite is true. I hqve stated repeatedly that the rule for KB would need to state that it caused wounds. Whether the normal to wound process causes wounds is a moot point for the banner, as it is KB that is killing then.
For Tyrion, it may become relevant - that a wound is caused as well as KB occuring - because that lets him use the item.
The banner still wouldn't get the save aginst KB.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Of course, snippeting the actual text would help.

Fine ill make this real easy. Pg 42 in the rule book on the Roll to Wound section. Read it. Any dice that equal or beat the score show on the chart have succesfully scored a wound. Since KB still uses the to wound chart and all 6s cause a wound than you run into another problem there. You still havent explained how KB can cause an Unsaved Wound on Tyrion and Malekith but no one else. KB is an effect that happens on the To Wound roll and since any dice roll of a 6 has successfully scored a wound and nothing in the KB rules negate that your still stuck. Please cite something that says KB doesnt cause a wound.
Pg. 55 HE book, "In addition, if Tyrion suffers an unsaved Wound that would kill him (including unsave Wounds that killed him as a result of the Killing Blow, Heroic Killing Blow or Multiple Wounds special rules, roll a d6 before removing him as a casualty;"
Theres your snippets of text. I dont have my DE book for Malekith but go look up the Witch King.
Prove that KB doesnt cause a wound please. KB doenst state anywhere that it doesnt. KB states on a TO WOUND roll of a 6 it happens and theres a whole To Wound Chart on pg 42 in the BRB that tells us what happens on a to wound roll of a 6 and nothing in killing blow negates it using that chart or doing a wound cause there is no rule for slay outright.
Yet again, once more, prove your point, make a case, stop stating you opinion and please cite some proof to your claims. Ive demonstrated 3 separate occurences to the point and youve demonstrated none and just stated an opionion.

Malekiths armour states if Malekith suffers an in unsaved wound from an attack that has the killing blow or multiple wounds special rules, he will only ever suffer a single wound. For those asking, I'm staying out of this lol

Unsaved wound which happens if you fail a save. Pg.45 BRB first paragraph, first sentence under Remove Casualities, "For every model that fails its save the target unit suffers and undsaved wound (anyd saves that were not possible because the modifier was too high alos count has having been failed)." Oddly enough though Malekith has no immunity to HKB unlike Tyrion.

UncleGlock wrote:
Fine ill make this real easy. Pg 42 in the rule book on the Roll to Wound section. Read it. Any dice that equal or beat the score show on the chart have succesfully scored a wound. Since KB still uses the to wound chart and all 6s cause a wound than you run into another problem there. You still havent explained how KB can cause an Unsaved Wound on Tyrion and Malekith but no one else. KB is an effect that happens on the To Wound roll and since any dice roll of a 6 has successfully scored a wound and nothing in the KB rules negate that your still stuck. Please cite something that says KB doesnt cause a wound.
Pg. 55 HE book, "In addition, if Tyrion suffers an unsaved Wound that would kill him (including unsave Wounds that killed him as a result of the Killing Blow, Heroic Killing Blow or Multiple Wounds special rules, roll a d6 before removing him as a casualty;"
Theres your snippets of text. I dont have my DE book for Malekith but go look up the Witch King.
Prove that KB doesnt cause a wound please. KB doenst state anywhere that it doesnt. KB states on a TO WOUND roll of a 6 it happens and theres a whole To Wound Chart on pg 42 in the BRB that tells us what happens on a to wound roll of a 6 and nothing in killing blow negates it using that chart or doing a wound cause there is no rule for slay outright.
Yet again, once more, prove your point, make a case, stop stating you opinion and please cite some proof to your claims. Ive demonstrated 3 separate occurences to the point and youve demonstrated none and just stated an opionion.

Ok, there are several separate issues here.
Firstly, to wound, The roll of a 6 causes a wound. The to wound process is the only way that wounds can be generated unless a rule specifically says that a wound is dealt.
KB is a separate effect which also occurs on a to -wound roll. It is not the same thing as the to wound process. Nowhere does any rule suggest taht KB itself causes wounds.
In a permissive rule set, you are not told what things don't do. Prove that rolling to hit doesn't wound, that flying doesn't wound etc; you can't, because things only wound when you are told that they wound.
For the majority of cases, the fact (which I would concede) that a wound is also dealt by the to-wound roll (as well as the separate effect KB), is totally irrelevant, since KB either kills or is saved. It seems that Malekith's entry is more clearly written - "suffers an in unsaved wound from an attack that has the killing blow or multiple wounds special rules" - there is an unsaved wound and there is killing blow. The same is true for Tyrion.
The problem for the banner, is that KB itself is not wounding (because wounds can only happen when an effect says that it wounds), so the wounds clause of the banner means it is not triggerred.

Opinion again. Cite something. Page 42 BRB To Wound Chart, all 6s=Wounds. Last sentence in third paragraph, any dice roll equal or beat the score causes a wound. Kill Blow states on a to wound roll of a 6 and theres nothing in the roll for KB that states it ignores the to wound chart or that a 6 to wound no longer causes a wound.
As you put it, permissive rule set, provdie permission that on a to wound roll of a 6 that KB needs to have happen that it no longer causes a wound which the 2 examples on pg 42 in the BRB and both the DE and HE book disagree with.
You need to provide permission to ignore the to wound chart since KB uses the to wound chart to activate and all 6s cause a wound.
Pg 44 Ward Saves, second paragraph, "Daemons, for example, have a ward save of 5+, meaning that score of 5 or more is required to prevent a wound." So according to this threads logic then no Ward saves can ever be taken against KB or HKB.

UncleGlock wrote:
Opinion again. Cite something. Page 42 BRB To Wound Chart, all 6s=Wounds. Last sentence in third paragraph, any dice roll equal or beat the score causes a wound. Kill Blow states on a to wound roll of a 6 and theres nothing in the roll for KB that states it ignores the to wound chart or that a 6 to wound no longer causes a wound.
As you put it, permissive rule set, provdie permission that on a to wound roll of a 6 that KB needs to have happen that it no longer causes a wound which the 2 examples on pg 42 in the BRB and both the DE and HE book disagree with.
You need to provide permission to ignore the to wound chart since KB uses the to wound chart to activate and all 6s cause a wound.
Pg 44 Ward Saves, second paragraph, "Daemons, for example, have a ward save of 5+, meaning that score of 5 or more is required to prevent a wound." So according to this threads logic then no Ward saves can ever be taken against KB or HKB.

No, not opinion. You are stating that because two things happen on the same roll, they are the same thing. The rules do not back up your position. KB is an effect which happens on the to wound roll. I agree with you that there could be an argument to have to save the wound as well as the kb, there has been a general assumption that saving the kb also saves the associated wound.
You have quoted several of the rules which I, and others, have quoted many times, but you have not cited any rule which says that KB itself does wounds - the rules only say that is slays the model outright.

You havent qouted a single rule yet. Ive already demonstrated twice that a to wound roll of a 6 is a wound. KB has no permission to ignore the to wound chart and you have yet to demonstrate anything to the contrary. So if a wound happens on a roll whether or not you have KB happening you get a ward save against as demonstrated with page numbers, book references and direct qoutes ver batim. All you have stated is your opinion and supposition by others. Ive read this whole thread thru.
Demonstrate somewhere that KB doesnt cause a wound or that it somehow or another has permission on its to wound roll of a 6 to ignore the whole to wound section and chart. Reference a book, a page, something. Otherwise according to your opinion no ward saves are allowed against KB cause it states that ward saves are against wounds and i cited page numbers for that too.

Does red fury wound? Does predatory instinct (or whatever the new lizard rule is called) wound? You have demonstrated that a to wound roll of 6 is a wound, but that is nit the same as proving that KB wounds. KB does not wound since it does not say that it wounds. A wound happens at the same time, caused by the "to wound" process. This is what is referred to in the DE book.
Demonstrate that KB is the same as the to wound rule (rather than an effect that happens on a to wound roll).
prove that moving does not cause wounds.
After those two things, you may have a case.

Incieentally, the reason I am not quoting rules AGAIN (since I have posted them repeatedly in the 6 threads that have dealt with similar things) is that you have just posted them. You wrote them coreectly, just seem to assume that they say more than they do in a classic 1 + 1 = 3 way.

Uncleglock - "cite"

Again., you are assuming that, because an item state "stops unsaved wounds form X", that X must necessarily cause wounds. This is a cart before the horse situation.

Please read the KB vs etereal thread, you will note you arent making a new argument, and are still failing to prove your point - you are assuming that, because a to-wound roll of a 6 generates a wound, that KB must also generate a wound. This is a poor assumption to make.

I dont know red fury but thats VC rule i believe. But why are you even quoting Predatory Fighter from the LM book. You dont even know what that rule does apparently, its on 6s to hit you get xtra attacks so enlighten everyone as to what that has to with wounding? Ive already demonstrated twice now that on the same page in the BRB that KB wounds. Ive also managed to source two different army books from the last 5 months that specifically call out unsaved wounds from KB. You apparently still keep missing the point. The only rules qoute you made here in this thread to back up your point was about ward saves and you got that wrong as well. Read the big bold print right under Savings Throw on pg 43. Basically with your logic there are no ward saves against any killing blow since both armor and wards are only for wounds. Disprove me. Permissive rule set and theres nothing in KB that separates it from the to wound roll of a 6 it needs to even do a wound. KB even calls out the to wound of a 6 in its rules. I have all the case i need. Instead of just deciding your right because your opinion says so, disprove me. Ive done enough to disprove you and your counterpoint is i dont have to provide any info cause im other threads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Im not assuming the to wound roll of a 6 wounds. Ive already pointed out in two army books alone that it does or else instead of saying UNSAVED WOUNDS from KB, etc. they would just say you ignore the effect of KB and take a wound.

Killing Blow does not replace standard To Wound rules, it only adds to them.
So you roll to wound. On a 6, you cause a wound. And also trigger Killing Blow.
Technically speaking, I'd guess that means that you'd take any saves you have versus Killing Blow, then take any saves you have against the regular wound.

No where in the Killing Blow entry does it say anything about wounds. So I'd have to say that the Banner doesn't trigger with a Bloodletter's Killing Blow.

To be honest, though, I'd never bother trying to push this technicality on anyone; it is quite clear to me that Killing Blow should cause wounds. It just doesn't, technically.

...of course, as accidental as those rules might be, they're still less ridiculous than the purposeful broken-ness of the Banner of the World Dragon.

Problem is all 6s cause wounds. And both Tyrion in the HE book and Malekith in the DE book specifically call out Unsaved wounds caused by KB.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, they do not answer the question - it negates any wounds caused, but if no wounds are caused it has no effect whatsoever. It is an assumption that you are making.

So is this just flat out denial?
The answer has been given in two written sources and you are still holding on that your interpretation that no wounds are caused is correct.

(apparently) 2 books state that KB causes wounds.

Black Horror causes no wounds. It is remove from play or remove as casualty. The Banner will not save it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Warpsolution wrote:
Killing Blow does not replace standard To Wound rules, it only adds to them.
So you roll to wound. On a 6, you cause a wound. And also trigger Killing Blow.
Technically speaking, I'd guess that means that you'd take any saves you have versus Killing Blow, then take any saves you have against the regular wound.

No where in the Killing Blow entry does it say anything about wounds. So I'd have to say that the Banner doesn't trigger with a Bloodletter's Killing Blow.

To be honest, though, I'd never bother trying to push this technicality on anyone; it is quite clear to me that Killing Blow should cause wounds. It just doesn't, technically.

...of course, as accidental as those rules might be, they're still less ridiculous than the purposeful broken-ness of the Banner of the World Dragon.

It's all over the KB example that KB wounds. This is the ethereal/KB argument all over again but with a banner instead of ethereal. The trump card was 2 army book stating that KB causes wounds which never really should have been in doubt.
Banner would give you a save against the Bloodletters sword. Because it is magical. It's not complicated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

UncleGlock wrote:
I dont know red fury but thats VC rule i believe. But why are you even quoting Predatory Fighter from the LM book. You dont even know what that rule does apparently, its on 6s to hit you get xtra attacks so enlighten everyone as to what that has to with wounding? Ive already demonstrated twice now that on the same page in the BRB that KB wounds. Ive also managed to source two different army books from the last 5 months that specifically call out unsaved wounds from KB. You apparently still keep missing the point. The only rules qoute you made here in this thread to back up your point was about ward saves and you got that wrong as well. Read the big bold print right under Savings Throw on pg 43. Basically with your logic there are no ward saves against any killing blow since both armor and wards are only for wounds. Disprove me. Permissive rule set and theres nothing in KB that separates it from the to wound roll of a 6 it needs to even do a wound. KB even calls out the to wound of a 6 in its rules. I have all the case i need. Instead of just deciding your right because your opinion says so, disprove me. Ive done enough to disprove you and your counterpoint is i dont have to provide any info cause im other threads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Im not assuming the to wound roll of a 6 wounds. Ive already pointed out in two army books alone that it does or else instead of saying UNSAVED WOUNDS from KB, etc. they would just say you ignore the effect of KB and take a wound.

I totally agree with you but
Unfortunately all this has been stated in the huge KB thread.
They do not accept this line or logical reasoning.
The two army books are the proverbial nail in the coffin for the 'no wounds' crowd.
Some will continue to deny it...I believe it is a form of cognitive dissonance.

 Peasant wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, they do not answer the question - it negates any wounds caused, but if no wounds are caused it has no effect whatsoever. It is an assumption that you are making.

So is this just flat out denial?
The answer has been given in two written sources and you are still holding on that your interpretation that no wounds are caused is correct.

(apparently) 2 books state that KB causes wounds.

Black Horror causes no wounds. It is remove from play or remove as casualty. The Banner will not save it.

No, this is not denial. It is called Logic.

If I tell you that the item Flying power! protects you from unsaved wounds caused by Flying, does this mean that Flying causes wounds?

Yes or No.

Now do you see the difference between stating that a process (to-wound) and a result (an actual wound) are two different things?

Pg. 43 BRB. bold print directly under savings throws.
"Each WOUND suffered may be cancelled if the controlling player makes a SAVINGS THROW. There are two types of saving throw: armour saves and ward saves. "
By logic you can never take a ward save against KB because your argument is KB doesnt cause a wound from it yet in two different army books and the wound table it does cause a wound. And a ward save cancels it as if it never happens. If KB doesnt cause a wound how can it even happen since its effect only happens on a to wound roll of a 6 and i make a save against that and cancel it. And yet KB specifically allows you to take a ward save and yet according to the rules for a ward save its only for wounds which is the same exact thing the banner says.
And Nosferatu both the Tyrion and Malekith specifically call out UNSAVED WOUNDS caused by KB your argument about flying causing unsaved wounds is rather pointless. Theres specific text in two army books now talking about it.

Again: stating you receive protection from X, does not mean X causes a need for that protection in the first place. That is incredibly basic

Cart

Horse.

You will find saving throws can be used against wounds, or when else they are explicitly allowed to operate. "Saves" help prevent damage - when allowed to. Wounds is one time they are (usually) allowed to help; some other effects - which never wound - also allow it.

Can you see the logical difference?

Read the rules for unsaved wounds. Cant have one without ever having a saving throw for it unless a special rule like the LM sword or dwellers or some such denies it. First sentence after the bold text on pg 45 of BRB tells us what an unsaved wound is. Ive got my team of horses in front of my cart so instead of making such an accusation cite a rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Heres a question, if i get hit by a poison on 6 can i use a charm shield to stop the poison wound from happening since i discared the very hit that caused the poison to happen?
Hit never happened so does the poison still apply? Exact same thing with a ward save against KB.

Uncle, I think you're new(ish) here, but we got like 2 or 3 locked threads on this subject very recently that all went to stupidly-long lengths. Every single question you have posed has been asked and answered at least twice in those threads. I recommend reading those until you begin to lose faith in humanity and you'll come back and not want to continue this thread.

Lol, Duke. I read thru those threads as well. Problem is like i said earlier noone ever made mention of the rules concerning both Tyrion and Malekith so i chimed in and got sucked in. Your right im done with this argument. I play demons and i know where i stand. I dont like Banner of World Cheese but everything ive read and cited says it stops my demons dead cold and nothing here has once given KB a separare effect from its to wound roll so as far as im concerned unless someone can actually prove my point to the contrary im gonna play it that way and im out of this argument.
And thanks Duke for the rather sound advice.

Well, as I (think) I said rather early. If they have unwarded KB or not vs. banner, matters unbelievably little. They're still going to get their asses kicked overwhelmingly.

Now I need to go off and buy DE book so I got something to read.

@UncleGlock You have read those threads and are still making those mainly silly arguments? The only new things are the items. The DE item doesn't make your case at all, since it only talks about the presence of the rule. The HE item doea not make your case either, as Duke has pointed out.

A implies B does not mean that B implies A; the fact that you can take wards against wounds dowoes nit even suggest that you cannonly take them against wounds. That is why p43 ir irrelevant - it is talking about wounds. It is p44 that talks about wards. So when things which don't cause wounds (Black Horror for example) say that you can take a ward, this does not suddenly imply that they cause wounds.

Here is a very simple test to see if effects cause wounds. Read Pit of Shades. Does it say it causes wounds? No. So it doesn't. Read plague wind. Does it say it causes wounds? Yes. So it does. Read KB. Does it say it causes wounds? No. So it doesn't. The to wound process causes a wound at the same time, but that is a different thing from KB.
I agree that the language for Tyrion is sloppy, and it falls in to the "you know what they meant, so HiWPI is let them have a 2+ against kb", but tht is HIWPI not RAW.