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.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Peasant wrote:
Your standard defense is show a rule..

Yes, it is useful in a rules debate to actually back up assertions with rules. Something you apparently struggle to understand.

You sir are a troll. You talk about rules debates, then assume I struggle to understand because I disagree. And then post tireless amounts of cr@p.

Peasant wrote:It is under Ethereal...
where it states MAGIC...
Why does everyone choose to ignore the part about magic?

We're not, you just seem to not be able to parse that sentence at all correctly. It states they can only be WOUNDED ***BY*** [list of items]

ONE of those items is an "effect".

Killing Blow does not cause a wound. So, given your rule only states they cannot be WOUNDED by anything other than magic, find where they can be protected from being SLAIN.

Anything?

Parse the sentence correctly..
No one of those items is '..wounded by..magic weapons or effects.' 'Or' is the conjunction that ties effects to magic. It does not say and effects.
Again how do you do damage to a model when playing this game?
You wound. You remove as a casualty. Slain is only used in killing blow, and when it is, in the killing blow paragraphs it frequently makes reference to wounds.

Peasant wrote:It seems pretty clear that if you don'y have magic the ethereal creature is safe other than combat res.

Only through a chronic misreading of the rule could you come to that conclusion.

troll. As unnecessary a comment as my troll comment.
You said yourself it is safe from wounding.

Peasant wrote:Why would you do anything if you can't do it. That makes no sense.

Indeed, what you wrote makes no sense.

Guess what I should write here...but I'm sure you get the point.

Peasant wrote:Rolling to wound when you can't wound is ridiculous.

Page quote for your assertion? This is a rules debate after all.

Anything?

You are unable to cause a wound, but you still follow the rules which state you roll to-hit, and roll to-wound. Unless you could, possible, FOR ONCE, find a rule that says otherwise?

Other than your assertion that it is rediculous?

Where are your rules? Again calling for them with nothing but troll.
Yes, you are almost there...you roll to wound but you cannot wound without magic. No killing blow.
You said yourself you are unable to cause a wound.
Find a rule that says you do NOT wound for killing blow.
Why does it say when you roll a six to wound and not when you roll a six??
Why does it say regardless of the number of wounds?
Why does it not say removed as a casualty as other instant death does?

Peasant wrote:If you can't charge, why roll charge distance?

Because you have a restriction saying you cannot charge, meaning you have no permission to roll charge distance.

Peasant wrote:Why shoot if you can't hit?

Ooh, you made a mistake there - when you have an effect that triggers. For example (pre 8th) when you were out of range with Skaven snipers, you were still required to roll to-hit in case you misfired.

You have a restriction saying you cannot wound without magic.
Where does it say no wounds are caused?
It does say regardless of how many wounds though.
And we are talking about 8th edition.

Peasant wrote:So a hellblaster should roll every turn to see if it misfires right?

No, because you have no declared a shooting attack with it. Basic rules concepts here, that you seem unable to grasp.

Okay so even though you only want roll 1 dice for your hellblaster you should roll all 3 because you could have misfired if you rolled all 3. Of course you won't do that not because that is negative and as ridiculous as rolling to wound that can't wound.
The only reason you want to roll to wound is to incorrectly create a positive affect on a difficult opponent.
So you tell me one paragraph above about misfiring then say no...hmm. interesting

Peasant wrote: Even if the target is out of range, because even though they can't reach they could still be trying to shoot and it could misfire. Ridiculous

Yes, your strawman, awful arguments are indeed ridiculous.

Do you ever stop.? I'm sure you will cry 'reported' with my responses to all your useless drivel and do a great job with getting this thread shut down.

Peasant wrote:Just because you can generate an attempt at a positive result does not validate the idea.

Where is your rule written that allows you to ignore the magic portion?

Given in the KB rules, which states it does not cause any wounds.

I am confused, you keep saying a rule about being unable to WOUND an ethereal creature has something to do with an effect that does not cause wounds. IT is a completely ridiculous equating of two entirely different concepts you are doing, and something you are doing with NO RULES BASIS at all.

Show me a rule that says it does not wound.
Killing blow does not state that it does not cause wounds. It states that when you roll a six to wound the model is slain outright regardless of the number of wounds.

None.
Nothing
Zip
Zilch
Nada

But then, this isnt the first time.

No, this isn't the first time is it?

So, how about - find a rule. Anything. And no, this rule is not contained in a line which talks about WOUNDING. This isnt causing a wound, this is slaying. Two different words, with two different in game definitions

It.. is... rolling...to...wound..it says rolling to wound.
Find a rule that talks about NOT wounding?
What rule says you do not wound? Why do you roll to wound if not to wound?

Mike - actually the argument is presented already. You are required, in close combat, to roll to-hit, and then to-wound. Find the line that states you cannot do so against ethereal creatures.

So it IS proven on this side, now the non-KB side have to show some actual rules.

You have proven nothing. Show the rule that ignores the roll to wound. You only roll to wound...to wound.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

DukeRustfield wrote:
Ethereal creatures can only be [wounded] by magical attacks, magic weapons or effects.

Yes. Can Ethereal creatures be made to take panic tests? Can they be subject to Terror? Can they be subject to Stupidity?

None of those are magic. For some reason you all are saying "...cannot be...magic attacks..." makes them immune to every single rule and subrule in the book. It applies to one and only one thing: being wounded. An extremely specific condition in the BRB that we all know. Is Terror being wounded? No, because it does not remove wound(s) from the profile and the special rule doesn't say so. KB likewise does not remove wound(s) from the profile nor does the special rule says so--it says slay.

Even if KB said, "take off one wound, just to piss them off, and then slay them." Ethereal would block the would being removed, but Ethereal does not block slay. It has no wording that says otherwise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lol, actually, I don't know what Ethereal does to stupidity because of the movement hindrance codicil. So like, forget that part, I don't want to open another can o worms.

How about this then...
If killing blow does not wound..what happens when you attack a dragon with your model with killing blow?..you roll a six to wound but you don't wound on a six, you killing blow and slay.(according to those that think it works on ethereal) It says they cannot be slain with a single blow. So you cannot wound on a 6 against monstrous beasts, mosters etc. It never says you only cause a single wound. And you are fighting to say killing blow does not wound on a 6.

Ridiculous idea

KB blow specifically says it doesn't work on unit types X. I'm not sure what you're getting at. You have to read the whole rule, where it says it only works vs. infantry, etc etc.

It doesn't say they cannot be slain with a single blow, it says KB doesn't work on them. The Special Rule has no effect on units not of that type. So you play as if the Special Rule wasn't there.

you are fighting to say killing blow does not wound on a 6.

As I already said, it is irrelevant if it does (though it doesn't). It can do 239482398 wounds. But it also slays. Ethereal blocks only against being wounded. There is no slay protection.

veelckoo wrote:
Also in BRB.4 it says that "if ...a model's ... Wounds are reduced to 0 or less ... it is slain ...."
So to be "slain" your wounds characteristics need to be 0. So by "slaying" Killing Blow is dealing multiple wounds.

DukeRustfield wrote:
As I already said, it is irrelevant if it does (though it doesn't). It can do 239482398 wounds. But it also slays. Ethereal blocks only against being wounded. There is no slay protection.

But there is very clear definition of "slain" as I allready quoted earlier.
And there IS Killing Blow "slain protection" ie. WARD SAVES.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So in your opinion Killing Blows are not counted in combat resolution, after all Killing Blow is just that, it does not say you're wounding your "slaying".
Well combat resolution rules do not say there is bonus for slaiyng anywhere.

 Peasant wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Peasant wrote:
Your standard defense is show a rule..

Yes, it is useful in a rules debate to actually back up assertions with rules. Something you apparently struggle to understand.

You sir are a troll. You talk about rules debates, then assume I struggle to understand because I disagree. And then post tireless amounts of cr@p.

Flawless counterargument

DukeRustfield wrote:
KB blow specifically says it doesn't work on unit types X. I'm not sure what you're getting at. You have to read the whole rule, where it says it only works vs. infantry, etc etc.

It doesn't say they cannot be slain with a single blow, it says KB doesn't work on them. The Special Rule has no effect on units not of that type. So you play as if the Special Rule wasn't there.

you are fighting to say killing blow does not wound on a 6.

As I already said, it is irrelevant if it does (though it doesn't). It can do 239482398 wounds. But it also slays. Ethereal blocks only against being wounded. There is no slay protection.

It really breaks down to process.
1. unit x attacks y
2.what weapon does he strike with? magic, non, halberd (why roll to hit if you can't wound later)
3.what does he need to hit? any bonuses to hit? any special rules on striking?
4.roll to hit
5.what does he need to wound? any special rules to wound? 4+always wounds, wound on toughness (no magic weapon , no wound)
6.roll to wound
7.any special rules after wounding? d6 wounds, toughness test, killing blow.
8.what is you save? What modifiers? -1, -2, 3 killing blows
9.roll saves
10. Do you get a ward?
11. Roll wards.
Do you roll armour saves when you arent wounded? You cannot apply killing blow before the roll to wound because you need the result of the roll. If your weapon is not magical you have no purpose to roll to wound.

It is exactly the same as Pick up and. . . Stuff in a bag. (See: any Giant)

No wound is done, so nothing in Ethereal prevents the effect.

 Peasant wrote:

DukeRustfield wrote:
KB blow specifically says it doesn't work on unit types X. I'm not sure what you're getting at. You have to read the whole rule, where it says it only works vs. infantry, etc etc.

It doesn't say they cannot be slain with a single blow, it says KB doesn't work on them. The Special Rule has no effect on units not of that type. So you play as if the Special Rule wasn't there.

you are fighting to say killing blow does not wound on a 6.

As I already said, it is irrelevant if it does (though it doesn't). It can do 239482398 wounds. But it also slays. Ethereal blocks only against being wounded. There is no slay protection.

It really breaks down to process.
1. unit x attacks y
2.what weapon does he strike with? magic, non, halberd (why roll to hit if you can't wound later)
3.what does he need to hit? any bonuses to hit? any special rules on striking?
4.roll to hit
5.what does he need to wound? any special rules to wound? 4+always wounds, wound on toughness (no magic weapon , no wound)
6.roll to wound
7.any special rules after wounding? d6 wounds, toughness test, killing blow.
You cannot apply killing blow before the roll to wound because you need the result of the roll. If your weapon is not magical you have no purpose to roll to wound.

I quite often agree with you Peasant, but here you are adding your own text. You get the process nearly right, but you add interpretation (such as why bother rolling, check weapon type etc).

The process is:
1) Roll to hit (apply any modifiers)
2) Any effects which trigger on rolling tohit
3) Any effects triggered on a hit
4) Roll to wound
5) Any effects triggered by rolling to wound
6) Any effects triggered by wounds
7) Saves
8) Effects triggeeed by unsaved wounds.

Ethereal comes in at step 6, while KB jumps you out of the sequence at step 5

~_~ this argument was finished long ago.


In order to effect ethereal, you need a "magic weapon or effect".


And yes, because of the way the sentence is worded that means magic weapon or magic effect. Magic is ment to cover both weapon and effect. Its redundant to write it twice.

Eihnlazer wrote:
~_~ this argument was finished long ago.


In order to effect ethereal, you need a "magic weapon or effect".


And yes, because of the way the sentence is worded that means magic weapon or magic effect. Magic is ment to cover both weapon and effect. Its redundant to write it twice.

j
Seriously? Where do you get that "it takes magic to affect ethereal"?
The rule says it takes magic to wound ethereal. That is all. Anything else you claim it says is just you making stuff up.

Since it is only wounding that is affected, things which do not wound are not affected by ethereal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You are correct that the argument has been over for a long time, so far as RAW is concerned. So why are you still arguing the side that lost?...

 veelckoo wrote:

Also in BRB.4 it says that "if ...a model's ... Wounds are reduced to 0 or less ... it is slain ...."
So to be "slain" your wounds characteristics need to be 0. So by "slaying" Killing Blow is dealing multiple wounds.

I'm sorry, but this is meaningless.

There are clear rules for movement and hexes and stopping movement yet Ethereal break those rules. Because Ethereal is its own rule. It trumps those other rules. There are clear rules for close combat, that come WAY before the Special Rules section. To-Hit/To-Wound/Saves/Wound/Dead. Yet Ethereal breaks those rules. Because Ethereal is its own rule.

Killing Blow is a Special Rule. It is under the Special Rules section. Once it's in play, it trumps everything that doesn't specifically address that Special Rule. Just like Ethereal.

Unfortunately, Ethereal blocks wounds. Which KB does not do.

Peasant - yep, your entirely ruleless, straightforward attack on a poster HAS been reported.

YOu failed, entirely, to provide a single rule that states you do not roll to-wound when facing Ethereal Creatures. Not one.

Your "argument" has been refuted (as much as it can be, given you failed to actually provide one) , and you can safely be ignored. Bye

To others able to debate with some semblance of sense - Eihn - Ethereal only talks about WOUNDING them. I.E. Causing Wounds. Something Killing Blow does not do

Find where killing blow causes wounds. When you have done so, page and para.

 veelckoo wrote:

Also in BRB.4 it says that "if ...a model's ... Wounds are reduced to 0 or less ... it is slain ...."
So to be "slain" your wounds characteristics need to be 0. So by "slaying" Killing Blow is dealing multiple wounds.

Oh, and to logic argument this:

model + (0 wounds) = slain

But you're assuming that slain can only have one formula. Such as:

5 +1 = 6

But

4 + 2 = 6
10 - 4 = 6
3 * 2 = 6

Six does not have one and only one formula possible. Slain is achieved however a rule says it is and is not limited by other implementations. 4+2 doesn't care about 10-4.

I quite often agree with you Peasant, but here you are adding your own text. You get the process nearly right, but you add interpretation (such as why bother rolling, check weapon type etc).

The process is:
1) Roll to hit (apply any modifiers)
2) Any effects which trigger on rolling tohit
3) Any effects triggered on a hit
4) Roll to wound
5) Any effects triggered by rolling to wound
6) Any effects triggered by wounds
7) Saves
8) Effects triggeeed by unsaved wounds.

Ethereal comes in at step 6, while KB jumps you out of the sequence at step 5

So really we differ in process as well
In combat I select my targets based on what I can and can't attack or wound. Sometimes I attack weak targets sometimes focus on a character.
Ethereal requires magic so I don't bother if I don't have magic.
According to your example if you have a character with killing blow on a dragon you roll all the dice for him and the dragon correct?
Dispose of the dragons rolls then look for 6's to see if you managed a killing blow. That doesn't make sense
Ethereal comes 1st when deciding valid targets.
You are adding steps 2 and 5. effects work only on successful hits and wounds.
As I have stated before rolling to wound means exactly that..to wound. You are not rolling to killing blow. It does not say on a roll of six. You are hoping to roll a six to wound to trigger killing blow.
After you wound you make armour saves. Killing blow gives you none. You are slain regardless of the number of wounds.
Unless you have a ward.

Ethereal does state you need magic to wound.
Killing blow does not state that it is magic. Killing blow state you must roll to wound. As stated you roll to wound, to wound. There is never any other time you are called on to roll to wound unless you are attempting to wound.

Unfortunately this debate will just go in circles because there is no new information to add for either side.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Peasant - yep, your entirely ruleless, straightforward attack on a poster HAS been reported.

YOu failed, entirely, to provide a single rule that states you do not roll to-wound when facing Ethereal Creatures. Not one.

Your "argument" has been refuted (as much as it can be, given you failed to actually provide one) , and you can safely be ignored. Bye

To others able to debate with some semblance of sense - Eihn - Ethereal only talks about WOUNDING them. I.E. Causing Wounds. Something Killing Blow does not do

Find where killing blow causes wounds. When you have done so, page and para.

I never said you don't roll to wound. I said you cannot wound without magic. Killing blow is not magic. You roll to wound and on a wound roll of 6 you trigger killing blow. If you do not wound with a six you do not killing blow.
example you wound on a 4+ and roll dice.
4, 5, cause a wound and you take your saves.
A six wounds and negates your save. If you have a ward you can save.
If you have no ward or fail it, you are slain regardless of the number of wounds the model has.
Killing blow is an effect caused by wounding. Just like d6/d3 wounds. Just like the items that cause you to take a toughness test.
If you cannot wound a 6 is irrelevant. It does not say on a roll of six
When you have a weapon skill zero, Do you roll your attacks that cannot hit?? No.

You have provided nothing.
Find where killing blow does NOT cause wounds. When you have done so, page and para

Your weapon causes the wound.
Killing blow talks about WOUNDING and WOUNDS through the ENTIRE description.
It does not say roll a six and remove as a casualty.

 Peasant wrote:
Killing blow state you must roll to wound. As stated you roll to wound, to wound. There is never any other time you are called on to roll to wound unless you are attempting to wound.

This is the crux. Though we seem to be saying it over and over. Ethereal protects against non-magic wounds. How do you know when a model is wounded?

When it is hit
Successful to-wound
Fail any saves
WOUND

Ethereal only blocks the last step. That's it. It makes no mention of hits. It makes no mention of to-wound. It makes no mention of saving throws. All it does is stop successful wounds. It doesn't stop unsuccessful wounds, because it doesn't say it does (and what's the point?). To wound you have to follow those steps in order per the BRB, because those are the only rules we have. Ethereal doesn't say to follow a different order, all it does is say that it can't be wounded. You don't know if you're wounded unless you roll a wound. You can shortcut those rules in some circumstances (Stomp, impact hits, etc). Killing Blow is another shortcut. But it doesn't end on wound and the only save you get is ward. That diverges from the normal BRB process.

We understand that it's a whole lot of steps for nothing. If a 5 attack mundane creature attacks, it's awful silly to roll all 5 attacks, stomp, roll to wound, roll to save, and then go "IT DOESN'T MATTER!" But regardless if it's silly, that is what the BRB tells us to do. And, if he has KB it does matter if he rolls a 6. Of course if the mundane creature didn't have KB or any other on-hit abilities, it would be perfectly okay to not roll because absolutely nothing could come from it. But if you were trying to kill time at a tournament (and be a jerk...) technically you could still force all the rolls because, again, nothing says not to. Though I wouldn't recommend it.

Okay just to clear things up for the person who said the reason why they didnt put magic in front of effects because its redundant

quote from pg. 68

"Conversely, Ethereal creatures can only be wounded by spells, magical attacks and magic weapons or effects."

First of all, if that was the case the proper way would be to list it as such, "spells, magical attacks, weapons and effects." The fact they left magical off of effects is due to certain abilities and rules in army books and the BRB that can kill the unit without wounding it.

But as it has been said a million times, the main issue is not that ethereal stops non-magical wounds, but how KB and HKB works. As it is written in the BRB

quote from pg. 72

"If a model with the Killing Blow special rule rolls a 6 to wound in close combat, he automatically slays his opponent - regardless of the number of wounds on the victim's profile. Armour saves and regeneration saves cannot be taken against a killing blow. A ward save can be attempted - if passed, the ward save prevents all damage from the killing blow."

Now the steps for determining KB and HKB is this

1)Striking Order
2)Roll to Hit
3)Roll to Wound
---A) Roll Dice that hit to see if they wound
---B) Consult Chart for wounds
4) Take Saving Throws
---A) Armour Save Roll
---B) Regen / Ward save
5) Remove Casualties
----Wounds go into effect

Now KB and HKB take place at the rolling to wound section, where as their special rule, the wound roll of a 6 basically is discounted because the model is slain, aka DEAD, The ethereal rule doesn't take place until you take the wounds which is after saves. because in the rolling to wound phase, you technically haven't taken any wounds yet, its only until after you do the saving throw phase that you actually take them. This is where i think the confusion on this issue is, misreading the rules. KB is a Effect, not an attack or spell or wound, but an effect that kills a creature outright, regardless of rules, unless that creature is not of the correct type, in which case there is HKB, and of course you get to take a ward save is you have one, because magic.

I just found a bit of an odd question myself. If somebody is given killing blow as an augment spell does it count as 'Magical' attacks? Perhaps i need to re-read the rules on this. I know that spells count as magical attacks so i wonder if killing blow granted by magic spells (like 'buffs') count as magical.

No.

Because you are merely giving a Special Rule. And the special rule isn't magic. If you give stomp it wouldn't be magic. Or impact hits. Only if it was a magic weapon with KB.

To clarify, a six is always a successful wound, in this edition.
There are things that can then cause that wound to be ignored.


None of that matters in the slightest way for this discussion.
Stating or implying otherwise is simply wrong.

DukeRustfield wrote:
I came in thinking it was definitely RAW but probably not RAI. I'm on the fence with RAI.

KB is the grand daddy of big moves in WHFB. And I know they got an equivalent in 40K and even like Eternal Warrior to stop it. But WHFB is less pure hard counter than 40K. Everything can beat anything, even if it's not easy. Even pure Ethereal troops can lose in combat rez. I just have a hard time seeing a Necrosphinx with a S10 HKB not being able to hurt a Spirit Host. S10 HKB is like being able to cut a 100 foot Greater Daemon in half, smashing a steam tank and everyone in it flat with one swing, etc. It's a big deal.

See. I agree raw it works. But rai, I disagree. I don't think they ever intended it to work that way. As I don't see how mundane weapons effect ghosts. They just go through them to no avail. I relate KB to like a "headshot" in FPS. You can headshot everything, but you can't headshot a ghost unless you have a specific weapon that allows them too.

I think they wrot ethereal with the thought that magic would be understood to apply to effects. The problem is, they did it wrong. Because they used magic twice in the sentence it makes it apply only to those. If they rephrased it "magic attacks, weapons, and effects" Or "magic attacks, magic weapons, and magic effects" I'd think KB wouldn't apply.

Have we found in the rules where removing a model on a 6 via killing blow is defined as an effect? I still feel like that's the crux of this argument.

And that's what i said, the fact they left the magic part off of effects, means it can be non-magical effects. Effects can include special abilities, basic rules, etc... Heck the argument for Ethereal not taking causalities from KB cause it rolls to wound is almost saying that Ethereal stops wounds from combat resolution from the unstable rule. Cause using the logic some have used in this whole argument, those wounds from unstable are not caused by magic, therefore Ethereal units can ignore them. Which is silly, and again to point out that's why there is no "magic" in front of the word effects in that entry for Ethereal.

*edit: Causalities from unstable would be an "effect" from a special rule to clarify, just as slain units are an "effect" from the KB rule

fattymac04 wrote:

*edit: Causalities from unstable would be an "effect" from a special rule to clarify, just as slain units are an "effect" from the KB rule

Thank you for this, as someone on the fence regarding this I like this explanation/analogy.

I still have trouble with the wording..' "Conversly, Ethereal creatures can only be wounded by spells, magical attacks and magical weapons or effects." Isn't this just a case of a missing (or needed) Serial Comma? I'm not saying the interpretation is wrong, but this can be read multiple ways right?

1. "Conversly, Ethereal creatures can only be wounded by spells,//magical attacks//and magical weapons or effects."
2. "Conversly, Ethereal creatures can only be wounded by spells,//magical attacks and magical weapons//or effects."

If I'm a TO and I read it the first way, i say KB does not slay ethereal units due to the implied 'magical' in front of effects. But if I'm a TO and I read it the second way, I'd have to say that KB DOES slay ethereal units. Personally, I don't see option 2 getting ruled as frequently as option 1 but (even as a VC player) I absolutely see the argument for 2.

Why does everyone keep asking about wounds?

It does not matter if the Ethereal can ignore the wound.

It is slain if a six was rolled, not wounded.

I assume people are asking because they aren't convinced and are looking for clarity.

Seeing that you're rolling to wound when hoping for the 6 result (Killing blow- "If a model with the Killing Blow special rule rolls a 6 to wound..." ) I don't think this is as clear cut as people on either side are making it out to be.

It is clear cut.

It just does not make sense from an in-game-world point of view.

Like putting an Ethereal creature in a bag is harmful? How can it even be picked up?!
wth

The whole wound thing keeps being brought up, because the argument for KB not working is that you have to roll to wound on a 6, and Ethereal ignore wounds from non-magical attacks, but as it has been stated by me and many others, that doesn't come into play because both happen at different steps in close combat and KB doesn't cause wounds, it slays.

To further clarify for you Jmsincla:

The way that section is worded is meant to be worded that way, there isn't magical in front of effects for a reason. It is not a case of a forgotten semi-colon. If they were trying to save time, they would have phrased it like this, "Magical attacks, weapons and effects." The fact they have magical in front of weapons means that it it doesn't mean magical effects, as there are effects in the game that cause wounds to Ethereal units that are not magical. If you look through the BRB you will find instances where it will say monstrous Infantry, Cavalry, beasts or such, it doesn't say monstrous Infantry, Monstrous Cavalry and beasts, thus implying that beasts is also monstrous, cause it wouldn't.

*edit In terms of in game, it can make sense. KB is a ability granted through magic or certain types of troops have it that basically means they have the knowledge of their weapon so down that they can kill instantly the heaviest armored soldier in the world with one strike, and they know how to place a strike to disperse the essence of a ghostly spirit. Just as the Giant attack would basically be dispersing the essence of the ghost, same as combat res wounds from unstable.

*edit2 for pgs on the whole wording order thing, pg 110 (warmachines in close combat), pg. 113 (whos been hit), pg. 126 (Garrisoning a building), pg. 128 (we is bigger dan dem...), etc... there's more, not going to sit here and list them all

EDIT- forgot quote

fattymac04 wrote:
*edit In terms of in game, it can make sense. KB is a ability granted through magic or certain types of troops have it that basically means they have the knowledge of their weapon so down that they can kill instantly the heaviest armored soldier in the world with one strike, and they know how to place a strike to disperse the essence of a ghostly spirit. Just as the Giant attack would basically be dispersing the essence of the ghost, same as combat res wounds from unstable.

That is actually pretty awesome.

Even so I think it funny a Giant cannot touch a ghost except to pick it up and put it in a bag.
Which destroys the ghost.



Classic.

editing to add:
Writing that entirely made me think of Tephanis.
Anyone else?

I will admit i screwed up there a second, they don't word it monstrous infantry, cavalry and beasts, but as monstrous infantry / cavalry / beasts. Still the same principal as i showed with my previous post with the edit with page numbers.

Yeah, it does seem weird about the whole giant thing is certain ways, but also makes sense. A giant looks down at a ghost and puts his hand down to pick it up to put into his bag. The hand disperses the ghost, yet the giant still thinks he put the ghost into his bag.

The only reason I know about this argument and rule situation is because this came up over a year ago with my friends during a battle before a campaign we were about to run. we figured it out and it makes sense that KB works on Ethereal and in the campaign the VC got a nice bonus for using Ethereal troops. We basically had it where if he lost a Ethereal unit or character to combat res or KB or some other effect, that unit wouldn't be lost, it would show back up in the army after the battle. The only time it would be lost lost, would be when it got killed by spells or magic weapons. It was pretty cool for him cause most of the armies he faced didn't have many magical attack units so he kept them with his armies most of the campaign.

I wouldn't put too much weight on commas. There is a huge debate among writers, publishers on the concept of Oxford Commas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma

In the end, the only real "rule" on comma usage is to make a sentence more understandable. Go back hundreds of years and you will see their usage is different. Some people love semicolons, and they were popular some decades ago, but they have almost completely disappeared from the modern English language.

As for KB being a headshot in FPS games, that's not a good analogy. Because all models are nearly the same in FPS games. A KB is an artillery strike in a modern FPS game. If you're in a tank, you die. If you're a lone soldier, you die. If you're in a foxhole, you die. It's just really hard to hit with them. The tank is normally immune to machine guns, pistols, and nearly anything else, except rocket launchers (magic). But if you call down a howitzer round, it will rock that tank upside down. I know analogies to other games are pretty pointless, but I just wanted to say it's not a headshot. Because you can't take a pistol (dagger) and headshot a tank (dragon). But you can HKB one.