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.

Your 3, Warpsolution, is related to the silliness that the (entirely legal and legitimate) multiple KB affecting a single model in a challenge gets so weird so fast.

editing to add:
The quote since it's a new page.

Warpsolution wrote:
3. The idea of especially skilled warriors laying low ghosts and other such disquiet spirits is laughably silly.
...but it makes me wonder:
Killing Blow does not cause wounds. So, when you roll a 6 to wound, and Killing Blow is triggered...is there anything that says it replaces the standard wound, or is it merely added on?
Example: an Executioner rolls a 6 to wound versus a High Elf Mage with a 4+ Ward. The Mage makes his Ward save against the Killing Blow...but does he also make a Ward save against the standard wound caused?
Obviously not what's supposed to happen, but since we're knee-deep in this stuff anyway, I thought I'd ask.

Warpsolution wrote:
I've been watching this for quite a while, and man-oh-man has it gotten crazy in here! I'd like to make two little comments:

1. I am sure that at least 90, if not 100%, of the people arguing that Killing Blow can affect Ethereal models are not arguing so because they hope to use such a rule against their opponents and decimate all who stand before them.
This is a rules debate, an entertaining thought-exercise that's led to some interesting ideas and made me think about the game from a different angle. That is the purpose of a thread like this, right?
Just so those people aren't being condemned as sneaky, greasy rules-lawyers.

2. I would like to make a general suggestion in regards to the art of persuasion: keep your reply simple and short. If it takes too long to read, the chance for misunderstanding will increase, and you'll have to backtrack, or get caught in a loop.
Pick the first aspect of the argument you don't agree with, and state why you believe it is incorrect. Once you've accomplished that, move on to the next.

3. The idea of especially skilled warriors laying low ghosts and other such disquiet spirits is laughably silly.
...but it makes me wonder:
Killing Blow does not cause wounds. So, when you roll a 6 to wound, and Killing Blow is triggered...is there anything that says it replaces the standard wound, or is it merely added on?
Example: an Executioner rolls a 6 to wound versus a High Elf Mage with a 4+ Ward. The Mage makes his Ward save against the Killing Blow...but does he also make a Ward save against the standard wound caused?
Obviously not what's supposed to happen, but since we're knee-deep in this stuff anyway, I thought I'd ask.

These steps have been tried. The problem is that there are some people that stick to 1 or 2 words that appear to be attempts to change the context of the sentences and paragraphs.
They also ignore words with the same purpose.
One of the first question that I asked was..
Following game process...
Why would you be asked to roll to wound if it was not for wound purpose?
Boomer had made many valid points that were never addressed or ignored.
Where is the instruction to ignore the wound you rolled.?
And when is missing text more relevant than actual text? i.e never says you cause a wound, but you roll to wound and slay regardless of the number.

I'm on ignore from many so this will mostly be skipped...again

Non-magical Killing blow vs Ethereal?

http://www.freewebs.com/lord_ofthe_rings/WeathertopWraiths3a.jpg

I think it worked out ok. Wraith was removed from play. In true warhammer fashion, he still showed up in the next battle.

-Matt

While all of you where arguing didja remember to spam GW's email with the issue so it hopefully gets addressed in future FAQs.

 Peasant wrote:

They also ignore words with the same purpose.

And the other's infer that different words are supposed to be the same thing despite, literally, being wrong.
"Wound" is a game term, not a purpose.

I already went over that. The wound HAS to be replaced with KB. If it is not the potential exists for enemies to take a wound AND be KBed. Which would mean KB does massive combat resolution since it explicitly states if you're KBed you score the full model wounds, and in fact in challenges you can score the full model wounds +5. So if 10 bloodletters score 5 KBs AND 5 wounds, they would be doing 10 combat resolution plus whatever other bonuses they had. Not much is going to win combat vs. large KB units unless they have overwhelming odds.

The people who say it does a wound would mean the above is true. The people who say that KB is triggered first, means you can only ever KB and not score double wounds. Because you can't cause a wound to a slain model, and as soon as KB succeeds, the model is slain. So you never get out of the to wound chart and take an armor/ward/regen save for the normal wound.

And, as has been pointed out repeatedly, KB and and Ethereal are just fluff rules. A ward save has been anything from luck (O&G/Skaven) to being really fast (Skaven) to god protection (numerous) to tribal tattoos(!). I mean this is a cannon hitting you in the face and your tattoo is going to stop it. The fluff section on KB says something to the effect of, "whether the blow is caused by skill or ensorcellment matters not, the target is equally as dead." There's just not a lot of Ethereal/KB units in the game so you can sorta say they are all ghosts and kung fu warriors. Slann can become Ethereal because...they think really deep thoughts. They also become Unstable thinking those really deep thoughts, which makes pretty much no sense whatsoever. And the guards sworn to protect them who will never leave them no matter what, no longer bother protecting them. Not everything makes perfect (or close to perfect) sense. Sometimes it's just balance.

That was the part, DukeRustfield, that sent me from "That's the way I read it" to "That is what they meant."

The rules are insane otherwise and chunks stop making sense at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peasant wrote:
I'm on ignore from many

I do not have anyone on ignore. Even people that are habitually wrong will share nuggets of wisdom on occasion.
The folk most likely to be ignored are also generally the most likely to point out something I had not read or thought of - it is less important to pay attention to the details of someone agreeing with me than it is to pay attention to those that don't.

This is not to say that my eyes do not glaze over as the same fallacies are repeated though.

(I did have myself on ignore accidentally for a bit. That was awkward.)

 kirsanth wrote:

 Peasant wrote:

They also ignore words with the same purpose.

And the other's infer that different words are supposed to be the same thing despite, literally, being wrong.
"Wound" is a game term, not a purpose.

Ah...this was my error. I forget people here are exceedingly literal and it was my error as people can't read my thought process.
That should have been...they ignore words with the purpose of changing context or usage to suit their needs. That was the purpose I was meaning to reference.

Someone mentioned the FAQ...
If GW put out a FAQ that KB works on ethereal...fine. its contrary but hey their game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DukeRustfield wrote:
I already went over that. The wound HAS to be replaced with KB. If it is not the potential exists for enemies to take a wound AND be KBed. Which would mean KB does massive combat resolution since it explicitly states if you're KBed you score the full model wounds, and in fact in challenges you can score the full model wounds +5. So if 10 bloodletters score 5 KBs AND 5 wounds, they would be doing 10 combat resolution plus whatever other bonuses they had. Not much is going to win combat vs. large KB units unless they have overwhelming odds.

Why does it have to?
The simplest solution is the best as it satisfies all aspects and stages of the game.

Killing blow is and effect just like multiple wounds only it is all the wounds on the profile.
If you play KB this way there is no confusion with any part of gameplay from rolling to wound to removing casualties to combat resolution.

All though if this is the case...it definitely doesn't work on ethereal without a magic weapon.

Except that Multiple wounds is nothing like KB.

Multiple wounds pg. 73

Each unsaved wound inflicted by an attack with the Multiple Wounds special rule is multiplied into more than one wound. The exact number of wounds caused will vary from model to model and weapon to weapon, but will normally be shown in brackets as part of the special rule. For example, Multiple wounds (2) would mean that each unsaved wound would multiply to 2 wounds, whilst Multiple wounds (d6) would mean that each unsaved wound would multiply to d6 wounds.
Where the number of Multiple wounds is generated by a dice roll, roll a dice separately for each unsaved wound and use the total of all the dice rolled for the final number of wounds inflicted.

Notice this specifically says unsaved wounds, and inflicted wounds, where KB does not mention wounds. The only thing they have in common is each add an additional step in the order of things.

fattymac04 wrote:
Except that Multiple wounds is nothing like KB.

Multiple wounds pg. 73

Each unsaved wound inflicted by an attack with the Multiple Wounds special rule is multiplied into more than one wound. The exact number of wounds caused will vary from model to model and weapon to weapon, but will normally be shown in brackets as part of the special rule. For example, Multiple wounds (2) would mean that each unsaved wound would multiply to 2 wounds, whilst Multiple wounds (d6) would mean that each unsaved wound would multiply to d6 wounds.
Where the number of Multiple wounds is generated by a dice roll, roll a dice separately for each unsaved wound and use the total of all the dice rolled for the final number of wounds inflicted.

Notice this specifically says unsaved wounds, and inflicted wounds, where KB does not mention wounds. The only thing they have in common is each add an additional step in the order of things.

They aren't going to be identical. They are two different rules. Yet they play similar. If you apply KB wounds in the same place that you are rolling your d3(d6) the game process makes sense. There is no rules conflict or questions.
There is no need for additional steps.
In overkill pg.103 it even references wounds inflicted by killing blow.


KB tells you to roll to wound and you potentially don't get armour saves. So there is no need to tell you that unsaved wounds will kill you it has already been said..multiple wounds may not kill you.
"..roll to wound..on a 6...armour saves cannot be taken. But you are told you get a ward which stops everything.

KB doesn't need descriptions like multiple wounds because it can't be as specific since there are many different profiles. But it tells you '..regardless of the number of wounds on the profile".

KB doesn't need to tell you to roll a dice for the unsaved wounds because If you warded them nothing happens if you didn't ward them they are obviously unsaved and you will lose them all. There is no need to reference.

There is no reason to complicate KB.

fattymac04 wrote:
Except that Multiple wounds is nothing like KB.

Really?

Quote BRB p103
"add up all of the wounds inflicted on the victim,
even those from a weapon causing multiple
wounds, or by repeated Killing Blows (each
successful Killing Blow scores the same amount
of wounds the slain character has on its profile"

Now that seems to say they are worked out in the same fashion. It also says "wounds inflicted..by...killing blow"

Notice this specifically says unsaved wounds, and inflicted wounds, where KB does not mention wounds. The only thing they have in common is each add an additional step in the order of things.

Except for all the places where it mentions that killing blow inflicts wounds?

Like on p52 under the section "Wounds Inflicted" where they felt the need to change the language in the FAQ from

"Attacks that kill a model outright (made with a
Killing Blow, say - see page 72) count as having
scored all the slain model's remaining wounds"

To

"Attacks that kill a model outright (made with a
Killing Blow, say - see page 72) score the same amount of
Wounds as the slain model has on its profile."

Or that it says killing blow does damage and damage is defined as

QUOTE BRB p3

"WOUNDS (W)
This shows how much damage a creature can
take"

How about the fact that I have shown that Killing Blow does nothing to MI/MC if you try and make it a replacement effect? Can you show me the page in the BRB where it says Killing Blow is "not in effect against MI/MC?

Also, don't worry. I'll send this off to Gamefaqs@gwplc.com once a week until an answer is given.

I just wonder if any of you are going to have the manners to admit you were wrong and apologise for all the insults and accusations of trolling that have been used in lieu of citations and page references.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

DukeRustfield wrote:
I already went over that.

No, I've already gone over that actually. Once again can you show me where it says Killing Blow is not in effect against MI or MC? Cite me the page number or part of the FAQ, give me the rule.

I've already shown how it only works as a wound effect like d3 or d6 wounds, it even works in challenges exactly the same

The people who say that KB is triggered first, means you can only ever KB and not score double wounds. Because you can't cause a wound to a slain model, and as soon as KB succeeds, the model is slain. So you never get out of the to wound chart and take an armor/ward/regen save for the normal wound.

And what happens when you successfully ward save the Killing Blow? It seems you haven't thought this all the way through. Fortunately, I have.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

DukeRustfield wrote:
I'm a slow learner, but it was clear they won't ever change their opinion. If the entire staff of GW came to this site, updated the FAQ, and gave us updated copies of the BRB they would still disagree. In the bottom right of their post you can choose to Ignore. There's a lot of good debates on dakka, don't get hung up on the bad ones.

Losing an argument? Try a popularity campaign instead! Admitting you were wrong is for losers!

Sheeesh..... and it was you who was going on about making fallacious arguments...

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:


Except for all the places where it mentions that killing blow inflicts wounds?

Like on p52 under the section "Wounds Inflicted" where they felt the need to change the language in the FAQ from

"Attacks that kill a model outright (made with a
Killing Blow, say - see page 72) count as having
scored all the slain model's remaining wounds"

To

"Attacks that kill a model outright (made with a
Killing Blow, say - see page 72) score the same amount of
Wounds as the slain model has on its profile."

This is actually a change in combat res.
If I have 3 wounds on my profile, and I have taken a wound, I have two remaining.
You hit me three times with killing blow in a challenge.
With the old rule, the first killing blow is worth 2 (remaining wounds) and the second and third killing blow are worth nothing (as I now have no wounds remaining).

With the FAQ, the first, second and third killing blow are all count as scoring 3 wounds for combat res; for a total score of 9, which is then reduced to 7 by the over-kill rules.

The reason for the change is that previously, multiple killing blows would have done nothing for combat resolution.

-Matt

The fact that combat resolution counts wounds differently than wounds are dealt with for resolving who is alive is too much for some.

Despite the clear delineation in the rules.

editing to add:
Hell, even the rules are more clear than my whining about the mis-reading people are repeating.

Also, I do not read the text posted as mis-reading, but rather as a deliberate mis-applying of the text to match preconceived notions.

RAI posted as RAW again!





(read that last bit as Mr. Torgue.)

What rules are broken when you apply KB as you do multiple wounds??

None.

Is this still here? I lost interested after page 5

The people arguing against it are using vast numbers of logical fallacies. And at this point http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion.

-You can fly if you flap your arms.
-But you can't and here are the physics reasons why.
-Yeah, but you can fly if you flap your arms.

 Peasant wrote:
What rules are broken when you apply KB as you do multiple wounds??

None.

Two big differences. Multiple wounds: requires a successful wound, then allows armour saves, then regeneration or ward saves and then kicks in. Multiple wounds works on all unit types.

Killing Blow: comes straight off the to wound roll (so no need to check the toughness / strength table, ethereal etc), does not allow an armour or regeneration save, but does allow a ward save. Killing Blow only works on some types of unit.

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:

Killing Blow is very clear about the way in which it is used. On a "to wound" roll of a 6, the model is slain. Not on a succesful roll. Not on a "to wound" roll, which had a chance of working, of a 6.

That is why it is you who needs to give the BRB section. The rule, as it is Written, does not care if the to wound roll is otherwise successful.

This is also why T does not matter - it is not dependent on a successful wound.

Why are we discussing this here?

We are discussing this here because it is a further example (if any were needed) that KB does not cause wounds. You may think that it should work anyway regardless of T, but there is no such rule -KB just kills, without wounding, without consulting the wounding table, without checking if something is Ethereal. How do you know that? You read and follow exactly what is written as the rules under Killing blow. "If a model with the Killing Blow special rule rolls a 6 to wound he automatically slays his opponent"
There are no loopholes given, no space for ethereal to come into.

Warpsolution wrote:


1. I am sure that at least 90, if not 100%, of the people arguing that Killing Blow can affect Ethereal models are not arguing so because they hope to use such a rule against their opponents and decimate all who stand before them.
This is a rules debate, an entertaining thought-exercise that's led to some interesting ideas and made me think about the game from a different angle. That is the purpose of a thread like this, right?
Just so those people aren't being condemned as sneaky, greasy rules-lawyers.

Absolutely - no piece that I play with has Ethereal, only one has KB (Gorebeast Chariot), but nobody I play against uses Ethereal, or even armies which have Ethereals. I don't expect to ever use this. I would welcome GW changing this with an FAQ so that it didn't work, as I think it is silly, but RAW is RAW until it is rewritten.

Niteware wrote:

 Peasant wrote:
What rules are broken when you apply KB as you do multiple wounds??

None.

Two big differences. Multiple wounds: requires a successful wound, then allows armour saves, then regeneration or ward saves and then kicks in. Multiple wounds works on all unit types.

Killing Blow: comes straight off the to wound roll (so no need to check the toughness / strength table, ethereal etc), does not allow an armour or regeneration save, but does allow a ward save. Killing Blow only works on some types of unit.

Thank you for restating parts of the rules and the fact that they are different. That is not a question. Neither of your statements shows any errors in the gaming process if you apply KB damage at the same time as you would multiple wounds.
BOth follow game process, nothing breaks out of process there is no new rule and there is none needed. No extrapolation. You are over thinking the entire process.
Answer this very simple question.
Could you follow all the normal game processes and apply KB damage at the same time as you roll for your multiple wounds?
Yes or no. It is a simple question.

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:

Killing Blow is very clear about the way in which it is used. On a "to wound" roll of a 6, the model is slain. Not on a succesful roll. Not on a "to wound" roll, which had a chance of working, of a 6.

That is why it is you who needs to give the BRB section. The rule, as it is Written, does not care if the to wound roll is otherwise successful.

This is also why T does not matter - it is not dependent on a successful wound.

Why are we discussing this here?

We are discussing this here because it is a further example (if any were needed) that KB does not cause wounds. You may think that it should work anyway regardless of T, but there is no such rule -KB just kills, without wounding, without consulting the wounding table, without checking if something is Ethereal. How do you know that? You read and follow exactly what is written as the rules under Killing blow. "If a model with the Killing Blow special rule rolls a 6 to wound he automatically slays his opponent"
There are no loopholes given, no space for ethereal to come into.

Actually they happen in two different places. KB at the Roll To Wound step and multiple wounds is at the take unsaved wounds step. They do not happen at the same time, it clearly states it in both rules. If you can not read that, or even interpret that they are in different phases you are either trolling or just being a moron. They also each add an additional step beyond the normal game play when they trigger.

KB happens at the Roll to wound step. On a roll of a 6, you slay the target right there and right then, but they do get a Ward save if they have one. This is out of order as described by the rule.

Multiple wounds is when you take unsaved wounds, so after the roll to wound, saving throws steps but right before remove casualties step. It says to take each unsaved wound and multiply it. That is an additional step that is being added in.

Besides each adding in an additional step, they are not the same, they happen at different phases, multiple wounds deals with wounds, KB deals with instantly removing a model.

So no to your question you cannot do both at the same time because they are different and happen in different steps.

Your last section does not make sense, KB does not say ignore Ethereal.

Like I said a couple a pages ago and I will say it again, you are trolling, you are a troll, so please stop because what your saying does not make sense.

Also you are just plain making stuff up and making broad interpretations that are not in the rules at all.

Actually it's different steps in a phase, watch your wording this is the internet

EDIT: Ah you got it before i posted, good job

fattymac04 wrote:
Also you are just plain making stuff up and making broad interpretations that are not in the rules at all.

This much is true.

The rules are clear.

People's interpretations are not generally in line with them.
That is not really odd.

fattymac04 wrote:
Actually they happen in two different places. KB at the Roll To Wound step and multiple wounds is at the take unsaved wounds step. They do not happen at the same time, it clearly states it in both rules. If you can not read that, or even interpret that they are in different phases you are either trolling or just being a moron. They also each add an additional step beyond the normal game play when they trigger.

Sigh..I really should just stay away from the children of the internet but I suppose I am a glutton..
Let me try again..

KB happens at the Roll to wound step. On a roll of a 6, you slay the target right there and right then, but they do get a Ward save if they have one. This is out of order as described by the rule.

Yes KB triggers on the '6' to wound. If we look at a model with a single wound in light armour and your model is S5..the process is identical.
Give him a shield for his ward... The process is the same. Start to finish.
Nothing out of order other than your preconceived overthinking notion that KB doesn't wound.

Multiple wounds is when you take unsaved wounds, so after the roll to wound, saving throws steps but right before remove casualties step. It says to take each unsaved wound and multiply it. That is an additional step that is being added in.

KB doesn't allow armour saves, so it is an unsaved wound. You rolled to wound. multiple wounds is rolling a d'x', KB is all the wounds on the profile. They both take wards at the same time. Again same result. They both fit in the process no extra thought. No twisting, cross referencing.

Besides each adding in an additional step, they are not the same, they happen at different phases, multiple wounds deals with wounds, KB deals with instantly removing a model.

You are creating the need for an extra step. The flow chart remains the same. multiple wounds has an extra step because you roll a dice KB is the number on the profile. No problems

So no to your question you cannot do both at the same time because they are different and happen in different steps.

It's late but when I get a chance I can type it side by side so you can see how they work in the process. The differences are not as complex as you are making them out to be.

Your last section does not make sense, KB does not say ignore Ethereal.

And KB does not say it works on Ethereal. Yours and my statement here mean nothing

Like I said a couple a pages ago and I will say it again, you are trolling, you are a troll, so please stop because what your saying does not make sense.

Also you are just plain making stuff up and making broad interpretations that are not in the rules at all.

Just because our opinion is different does not make me a troll.
Just because you are failing to understand does not make me a troll.
I have made up nothing and your interpretation is much more broad then mine.
The only thing you are proving, is yourself to be a child with your name calling.
If you don't understand, ask, I will try harder to clarify for you

fattymac04 wrote:
KB happens at the Roll to wound step. On a roll of a 6, you slay the target right there and right then, but they do get a Ward save if they have one. This is out of order as described by the rule.

A few questions if you'd be so kind to answer

1: Can you give me a page reference for the rule term "slays"? I see slay, slays and slain a fair few times in the BRB.

Such as when describing wounds (p3)

Large monsters and mighty heroes are often
able to withstand several wounds that would
slay a smaller creature,

or under Wounds Inflicted (p52)

most characters and
monsters have more than one wound and it can
take several rounds of combat to slay them.

or under War Machines (p87)

even slay fearsome monsters with a single,
well-placed shot.

Do War Machines not cause wounds? Because I see the word slay there. I mean, I know it never refers or references the section on Instant Kills.. but neither does Killing Blow.

Multiple wounds is when you take unsaved wounds, so after the roll to wound, saving throws steps but right before remove casualties step. It says to take each unsaved wound and multiply it. That is an additional step that is being added in.

Besides each adding in an additional step, they are not the same, they happen at different phases, multiple wounds deals with wounds, KB deals with instantly removing a model..

OK, so you've argued that Killing Blow is a replacement effect as if it was doing a wound as well we'd be in a very weird situation.

So, that being the case (once again) can you tell me where you are getting a wound from when you roll a 6 when fighting monstrous infantry?

Remember that Killing blow only says

"Killing Blow is only effective against infantry,
cavalry and war beasts "

It doesn't say it is not in effect. Using a pea shooter against a tank is not effective, but can still be done. So, please quote me a page reference for saying "Killing Blow is not in effect" or except the full implications of what you are arguing.

 Peasant wrote:

Niteware wrote:

 Peasant wrote:
What rules are broken when you apply KB as you do multiple wounds??

None.

Two big differences. Multiple wounds: requires a successful wound, then allows armour saves, then regeneration or ward saves and then kicks in. Multiple wounds works on all unit types.

Killing Blow: comes straight off the to wound roll (so no need to check the toughness / strength table, ethereal etc), does not allow an armour or regeneration save, but does allow a ward save. Killing Blow only works on some types of unit.

Thank you for restating parts of the rules and the fact that they are different. That is not a question. Neither of your statements shows any errors in the gaming process if you apply KB damage at the same time as you would multiple wounds.
BOth follow game process, nothing breaks out of process there is no new rule and there is none needed. No extrapolation. You are over thinking the entire process.
Answer this very simple question.
Could you follow all the normal game processes and apply KB damage at the same time as you roll for your multiple wounds?
Yes or no. It is a simple question.

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:

Killing Blow is very clear about the way in which it is used. On a "to wound" roll of a 6, the model is slain. Not on a succesful roll. Not on a "to wound" roll, which had a chance of working, of a 6.

That is why it is you who needs to give the BRB section. The rule, as it is Written, does not care if the to wound roll is otherwise successful.

This is also why T does not matter - it is not dependent on a successful wound.

Why are we discussing this here?

We are discussing this here because it is a further example (if any were needed) that KB does not cause wounds. You may think that it should work anyway regardless of T, but there is no such rule -KB just kills, without wounding, without consulting the wounding table, without checking if something is Ethereal. How do you know that? You read and follow exactly what is written as the rules under Killing blow. "If a model with the Killing Blow special rule rolls a 6 to wound he automatically slays his opponent"
There are no loopholes given, no space for ethereal to come into.

Move up to part 1 of this post.
This is more over thinking of the process. You are adding process where none is necessary.
Check if the model is ethereal when you chose your target. If you have 2 models in base contact you are going to find out who you are most effective against. No magic you don't attack it. If one was infantry and one was a monster this is where you'd find out which. Which is a character, highest threat, easiest victim. You don't check model type later.
If you were in base to base with a normal and an ethereal model with a normal troop, this is where you look at your non magic item against ethereal and choose the other target.
You appear to be making your flow chart go in a very confusing order. That could explain your difficulties
And again...you are rolling to wound, you have started the process. It is your assumption that is changing things not the rule.

Putting it very simply then, you don't play them the sake because KB doesn't reference the opponents model at all, apart from unit type. Multiple wounds follows the normal wounding process, comparing s and t, looking up table, calculating AS, decidng best choice of regen or ward etc.

KB doesn't do wounds - it doesn't consult the wound table at all.

I believe you are over complicating KB by trying to find loopholes to get out of it.

Edited to fix quote and to add: You seem to assume that you will always have a choice not to attack ethereal with mundane troops. This is not the case, it does not add to your argument, why keep btinging it up?


@Boomer The word slay (and various conjugations of it) are used throughout the BRB to mean dead. You and various others have listed many. A subset of those times involve wounds. Others include instant kills, characteristics dropping to 0 and Killing Blow.
Many words that are used throughout the rule book are not defined by it - this does not mean that they losetheir usual meaning.

What a mess. Let me see if I've got the crux of each argument right-

Argument 1: the Killing Blow special rule may remove models with the Ethereal special rule as casualties because it does not cause a wound.

Argument A: the Killing Blow special rule causes wounds because you roll on the To Wound table, and therefore, cannot remove models with the Ethereal special rule as casualties.

Is that right? Or have the centers of either/both arguments changed?

Probably that's the simplest form. Since Ethereal mentions wound(ed) and KB mentions slain. There's tons of other caveats and order of operations and such, but the crux is wound or not.

Niteware wrote:

Putting it very simply then, you don't play them the sake because KB doesn't reference the opponents model at all, apart from unit type. Multiple wounds follows the normal wounding process, comparing s and t, looking up table, calculating AS, decidng best choice of regen or ward etc.

KB doesn't need to. You do. Let me show you side by side. vs. model with light armour and shield
Model with KB fights S5... and a model with multiple wound model S5

roll to hit, hits
roll to wound. chk chart 6.. wound chk model type. inf KB triggers
No armour save. KB cancels .
ward
a.pass ward..model survives
b.fail ward model dies

roll to hit, hits
roll to wound 6. wound..model type monster no KB
no armour save
ward
a.pass ward..model survives
b.fail ward model dies

roll to hit, hits
roll to wound. 6. wounds
no armour save
ward
a.pass ward..model survives
b.fail ward, multiple wounds, model dies


Same process. No deviation. No different flow chart. No overthinking. Same game play. No confusion. No conflict. The only necessary change could come after failing the ward if the model had say, 3 wounds...still....same process, just different result at the end. Follow the game play process.

KB doesn't do wounds - it doesn't consult the wound table at all.

I believe you are over complicating KB by trying to find loopholes to get out of it.

Rolling to wound consults the chart. You are never told not to consult the chart. If a rule requires changing steps it tells you.
KB tells you to cancel armour.
KB tells you your model is slain regardless of the number of wounds. It never tells you ignore the wounds or not to check on the S vs. T chart.
No wounds is your assumption. There is no reason to ignore the wound you rolled. In fact, ignoring the wound roll of 6 makes it impossible to wound the monster. The game process must be the same for all models.
By not causing wounds you are jumping back and forth complicating things.
I'm not looking for loopholes I am following the standard game play flow chart.

Edited to fix quote and to add: You seem to assume that you will always have a choice not to attack ethereal with mundane troops. This is not the case, it does not add to your argument, why keep btinging it up?

I bring it up to show when you check if the model is ethereal. Which is when choosing your target. Mundane can't wound. Your model with KB is carrying a mundane weapon he cannot wound. The idea that you can still roll to wound because you have KB makes no sense to game process. The idea that just because you can physically roll the dice that you can bypass that you are rolling 'TO WOUND'...
That is seeking a loophole.

@Boomer The word slay (and various conjugations of it) are used throughout the BRB to mean dead. You and various others have listed many. A subset of those times involve wounds. Others include instant kills, characteristics dropping to 0 and Killing Blow.
Many words that are used throughout the rule book are not defined by it - this does not mean that they losetheir usual meaning.

Yes it means the model is dead. The fact that KB description uses slays in the text does not open the door for special treatment especially when you are told to roll to wound.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Warpsolution wrote:
What a mess. Let me see if I've got the crux of each argument right-

Argument 1: the Killing Blow special rule may remove models with the Ethereal special rule as casualties because it does not cause a wound.

Argument A: the Killing Blow special rule causes wounds because you roll on the To Wound table, and therefore, cannot remove models with the Ethereal special rule as casualties.

Is that right? Or have the centers of either/both arguments changed?

Actually it started this way..

Argument 1: the Killing Blow special rule may remove models with the Ethereal special rule as casualties because it does not cause a wound.

Argument A: Killing blow is irrelevant unless your weapon is magical.

Then..
Argument 1: Became... just because you can't wound, doesn't mean you can't roll on the 'to wound' chart, so KB can work, because it never says you cause a wound when rolling 'to wound' in the KB text.

Argument A: So rolling to wound.... isn't 'to wound'...??? And you can't wound, but you will still roll to wound because you don't wound....?????

And it's snow balled and deteriorated from there

Personally, it never should have come up. The fact that ethereal can only be wounded by magic is pretty clear cut IMO.
Magic weapon and KB, of course.
No magic, weapon no KB.. but some will attempt to read between the lines.

p.51 Roll to Wound "Roll a D6 for each attack that hit."

p.68 Ethereal"...Ethereal creatures can only be wounded..."

p.72 Killing Blow "...rolls a 6 to wound...he automatically slays his opponent, regardless of the number of wounds..."

@Peasant: it kinda' looks like you're forced to roll on the To Wound table, regardless of whether you'll ever be successful or not. The only reason you're allowed to skip it is because, normally, there's no point, so you might as well save some time. Like fast dice-rolling. Can you offer evidence that shows otherwise?

 Peasant wrote:

Niteware wrote:

Putting it very simply then, you don't play them the sake because KB doesn't reference the opponents model at all, apart from unit type. Multiple wounds follows the normal wounding process, comparing s and t, looking up table, calculating AS, decidng best choice of regen or ward etc.

KB doesn't need to. You do. Let me show you side by side. vs. model with light armour and shield
Model with KB fights S5... and a model with multiple wound model S5

roll to hit, hits
roll to wound. chk chart 6.. wound chk model type. inf KB triggers
No armour save. KB cancels .
ward
a.pass ward..model survives
b.fail ward model dies

roll to hit, hits
roll to wound 6. wound..model type monster no KB
no armour save
ward
a.pass ward..model survives
b.fail ward model dies

roll to hit, hits
roll to wound. 6. wounds
no armour save
ward
a.pass ward..model survives
b.fail ward, multiple wounds, model dies


Same process. No deviation. No different flow chart. No overthinking. Same game play. No confusion. No conflict. The only necessary change could come after failing the ward if the model had say, 3 wounds...still....same process, just different result at the end. Follow the game play process.

KB doesn't do wounds - it doesn't consult the wound table at all.

I believe you are over complicating KB by trying to find loopholes to get out of it.

Rolling to wound consults the chart. You are never told not to consult the chart. If a rule requires changing steps it tells you.
KB tells you to cancel armour.
KB tells you your model is slain regardless of the number of wounds. It never tells you ignore the wounds or not to check on the S vs. T chart.
No wounds is your assumption. There is no reason to ignore the wound you rolled. In fact, ignoring the wound roll of 6 makes it impossible to wound the monster. The game process must be the same for all models.
By not causing wounds you are jumping back and forth complicating things.
I'm not looking for loopholes I am following the standard game play flow chart.

Edited to fix quote and to add: You seem to assume that you will always have a choice not to attack ethereal with mundane troops. This is not the case, it does not add to your argument, why keep btinging it up?

I bring it up to show when you check if the model is ethereal. Which is when choosing your target. Mundane can't wound. Your model with KB is carrying a mundane weapon he cannot wound. The idea that you can still roll to wound because you have KB makes no sense to game process. The idea that just because you can physically roll the dice that you can bypass that you are rolling 'TO WOUND'...
That is seeking a loophole.

@Boomer The word slay (and various conjugations of it) are used throughout the BRB to mean dead. You and various others have listed many. A subset of those times involve wounds. Others include instant kills, characteristics dropping to 0 and Killing Blow.
Many words that are used throughout the rule book are not defined by it - this does not mean that they losetheir usual meaning.

Yes it means the model is dead. The fact that KB description uses slays in the text does not open the door for special treatment especially when you are told to roll to wound.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Warpsolution wrote:
What a mess. Let me see if I've got the crux of each argument right-

Argument 1: the Killing Blow special rule may remove models with the Ethereal special rule as casualties because it does not cause a wound.

Argument A: the Killing Blow special rule causes wounds because you roll on the To Wound table, and therefore, cannot remove models with the Ethereal special rule as casualties.

Is that right? Or have the centers of either/both arguments changed?

Actually it started this way..

Argument 1: the Killing Blow special rule may remove models with the Ethereal special rule as casualties because it does not cause a wound.

Argument A: Killing blow is irrelevant unless your weapon is magical.

Then..
Argument 1: Became... just because you can't wound, doesn't mean you can't roll on the 'to wound' chart, so KB can work, because it never says you cause a wound when rolling 'to wound' in the KB text.

Argument A: So rolling to wound.... isn't 'to wound'...??? And you can't wound, but you will still roll to wound because you don't wound....?????

And it's snow balled and deteriorated from there

Personally, it never should have come up. The fact that ethereal can only be wounded by magic is pretty clear cut IMO.
Magic weapon and KB, of course.
No magic, weapon no KB.. but some will attempt to read between the lines.

The fact that you can construct a scenario where two different rules seem to act in a similar way does not mean that they are the same. KB does not consult the to wound table at all - that step usually comes after rolling to wound (as in Roll, then check result on table by comparing s to t). As Warp said (and as many others have said), following the rules forces you to roll for every hit, regardless of the likelihood of a positive result. KB then explicitly tells you what to do. There is no loophole to say "but KB can't hurt me because of X", unless X explicitly says that it makes you immune to KB, or because KB says that it is not effective.

Given that you have said that you wound as well as KB, do you think that after saving KB you should have to save the wound? In a challenge, do you also save the wound to determine overkill? If not, why do you stop following the rules for wounding, since KB doesn't tell you to?
The only logical conclusion is that KB happens instead of a wound, ergo KB does not wound, so ethereal is irrelevant.

Hrm. Well it seems my prediction from pages (and days) ago has come to fruition. The thread continues with neither side willing to concede their point. All this about an instance (Killing Blow being used on an Ethereal unit) that frankly happens very rarely. (Most armies don't have any access to Ethereal troops, not all of those armies even take said troops, Killing Blow is relatively rare, and most players don't play many models that have Killing Blow. Consequently, the number of times a unit with Killing Blow fights against an Ethereal unit is small.)

Is there really a legitimate in-game point as to why this thread is 10 pages long or that tempers have gotten this high?