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.

Ok, so this is interesting:

BotWD states that "models... have a 2+ ward save against all WOUNDS caused by spells..."

Black Horror states that: "...must pass a Strength test or be SLAIN OUTRIGHT with no armour saves allowed (a model MAY TAKE a single WARD SAVE, if it has one".

So, does the BotWD grant a 2+ ward against wounds caused by the Black Horror. I would be inclined to say no, because BotWD does specifically say Wounds and Black Horror specifically says slain outright, which I believe are two different things (could be argued otherwise though). That said, Black Horror grants specific permission to use a ward save.

I'm fairly sure it wouldn't work, but I play with and against HE a lot, so I thought I would best seek clarification/opinions before the inevitability of this cropping up in game.

No; no wounds are caused.

EDIT:

Looking this over, I'd like to change my vote. I think you would get the Banner effect.

All ward saves are taken against wounds so if that is the issue then you never get a Ward save against black horror despite it clearly saying you do.

No ward save.
Black horror is an instant kill. Most noticeably by its strength test. With instant kills wounds become irrelevant. (Instant kills brb pg44)

 Peasant wrote:
No ward save.
Black horror is an instant kill. Most noticeably by its strength test. With instant kills wounds become irrelevant. (Instant kills brb pg44)

However, in the Black Horror entry, it says rather explicitly that a model can take a ward save.

I should have been more clear.
No ward save from the BotWD.
BotWD grants a ward vs. wounds
Instant kills don't cause wounds.

And all ward saves are taken against wounds...

Unless they say they don't. New lizard sword.

 FlingitNow wrote:
And all ward saves are taken against wounds...

Armour of Destiny doesn't.
Talisman of Preservation doesn't.
Talisman of Protdction doesn't.
Mark of Tzeentch doesn't.
They all just state that they grant a ward save, not tha it is only against wounds.
Instant kills (p4?) don't cause wounds, so BOTWD doesn't grant a ward.

Niteware check the ward save rules. All those things give ward saves ward saves are taken against wounds.

Wounds are on of the things that wards can be taken against, however some ward saves define that they can only be taken against specific things: poison, flaming, magic and wounds being examples. Ward saves that do not specify can be used in any situation that allows a ward save. Wards which specify criteria can only bebused when those conditions apply.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Reading the ward save section p44, there is nothing that says they are for wounds. The only mention of wound is an example that says that a 5+ ward would need a 5 or higher to prevent a wound. So what were you meaning before?

Niteware wrote:
Wounds are on of the things that wards can be taken against, however some ward saves define that they can only be taken against specific things: poison, flaming, magic and wounds being examples. Ward saves that do not specify can be used in any situation that allows a ward save. Wards which specify criteria can only bebused when those conditions apply.

But the point is all ward saves are taken against wounds, this spell over rides that criteria. The reason you have wounds in the BotWD wording is because you take ward saves against sounds.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Reading the ward save section p44, there is nothing that says they are for wounds. The only mention of wound is an example that says that a 5+ ward would need a 5 or higher to prevent a wound. So what were you meaning before?

Yes... ward saves are a type of save. They are not defined in terms of wounds, only as a type of save. There are two main things that you take warss against: wounds and instant kills.
It seems like your argument is "ward saves can stop wounds, so anything stopped by a ward save is a wound" which is the same arguement as "Men can be American, so all Americans are men" or "A bus went past my house, so everything which passes my house is a bus".
Is there more to your argument than that? If so, sorry for missing it.

Ward saves can be taken against instant kills? Remember a Killing Blow is a To Wound roll (that has an additional effect), or are you trying to claim BotWD doesn't give a 2+ ward vs Killing Blows?

BOTWD doesn't give a ward against KB - there are other threads which deal with that - but KB tecjnically isn't defined as an instant kill. Instant Kills are test or die characteristic tests, which sometimes allow a ward save. They specifically state that they don't cause wounds, so BOTWD doesn't work.

Many Ward saves save against anything.
There are spelss that tell you that you get no saves of any kind. Like Purple Sun of Xereus or Pit of shades
BotWD would give you 2+ vs, spells like Uranons thunderbolt or Fate of Bjuna and Sprit Leech
I'd say BothWD would save against KB but any more comments on that you'll need to read the thread.

Instant Kills are test or die characteristic tests, which sometimes allow a ward save.

Give me an example of such a test that you get a ward save against other than Black Horror.

p44 Instant Kills
Some special attacks don't inflict wounds, but require models to be removed as casualties (after failing a Ld or T test for example). Where this is the case, not only are no saves of any kind allowed (unless specified otherwise) but the number of wounds on the victim's profile is completely irrelevant - just remove the model from play and hope for better luck next time.

This should be enough, as it is clearly the exact same template and categorically states that no wound was caused.

Can't think of any of top that actually allow a save atm (apart from the grey area of KB), but the option was explicitly left open. Others may be able to help you with examples.

Its not causing wounds though, so there is no trigger to set off the ward save.
It seems to bypass the banner without issue simply because it removes them without causing any wounds.

It doesn't matter there is a test or not. The word that matters is Wounds on the banner. A ward save is just a save and it crops up in shooting attacks, cc attacks, or when required in special rules. Final Transmutation doesn't have any kind of test at all, any kind of save at all, it just poofs you dead. No save, no wound, no banner.

If a spell/attack/weapon doesn't Wound, actually have the word "wound" in it, it doesn't apply to the banner. Now, pretty much every attack and weapon is going to wound. We know successful (Heroic) Killing Blows don't, just like final transmutation. But pretty much every other attack is just some version of a shooting or cc attack and it's going to cause wounds if successful.

The question is where do stuff like Blade of Realities (no ward saves) fall? The blade says no ward, but the banner says ward.

 FlingitNow wrote:

Instant Kills are test or die characteristic tests, which sometimes allow a ward save.

Give me an example of such a test that you get a ward save against other than Black Horror.

There aren't going to be many tests that the banner will protect you from, that is the point of the instant kills. How many points is the banner? If it gave you a 2+ward against everything it would have to be something crazy like 1000 pts.

But other spells it wouldn't work against are simple. Direct damage and magic missiles will most likely get the save. Hex, augment and vortex you would not.

If I understand your question right Spirit Leech is closest to what you are looking for. You roll d6 and add ld, then take a wound based on how many points the caster beats you by.
But again this is direct damage and also references wounds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DukeRustfield wrote:

The question is where do stuff like Blade of Realities (no ward saves) fall? The blade says no ward, but the banner says ward.

That is a good question. Which gets the trump card. I'd probably roll a dice. 50/50 shot either way. That will need some input form GW.

BotWD gives you a Ward save against magical damage unless that damage ignores ward saves. Like basically every test or die spell before Black Horror which specifically allows ward saves. Hence you'd get a ward save from BotWD as it is magical damage. The BotWD uses the term wounds as all saves are taken against wounds. Does anyone genuinely believe they'll FAQ the banner to not work against this spell?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Blade of realities certainly does ignore BotWD. Specific over rules generally. The Banner gives you a ward save the Blade specifies ward saves don't work.

Blade of realities and banner are both specific. They are both army level. Blade is a magic weapon that ignores ward saves. Banner gives a ward save vs. magic weapons.

Botwd doesn't give a ward save against "magical damage" or it would save magical damage. It gives a save against wounds from magical attacks.

 FlingitNow wrote:
BotWD gives you a Ward save against magical damage unless that damage ignores ward saves. Like basically every test or die spell before Black Horror which specifically allows ward saves. Hence you'd get a ward save from BotWD as it is magical damage. The BotWD uses the term wounds as all saves are taken against wounds. Does anyone genuinely believe they'll FAQ the banner to not work against this spell?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Blade of realities certainly does ignore BotWD. Specific over rules generally. The Banner gives you a ward save the Blade specifies ward saves don't work.

Do you have any rules that back up anything you wrote.? Wards never state that they only save wounds, the banner specifically states that it does. Black Horror specifically doesn't cause wounds. How can you think these things are irrelevant?
As to banner vs blades, I think blades wins, since it says no ward aave, while banner doesn't say you always get a ward - botwd gives you a ward save if you are allowed to take one ie you are wounded and allowed a save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for FAQ, it would have to FAQ it for the banner to work, as RAW is pretty clear - one specidlfically does not cause wounds, the other specifically wards against wounds.

I agree RaW that the Banner doesn't work. I was just explaining why it is written the way it is. I guess against the old stream of corruption which required you to take a toughness test or suffer a wound you'd take all your toughness test and say nobody takes a wound as you had taken the test? Or that you play that anything with an armour save written in their Army Book can't have it modified by strength as Army book trumps Rulebook?

Erm, no... don't see how "blatamtly not followwing the rules" could be inferrsd from "talking about how the rules work, which you agree is RAW".
Army book only trumps rule book when they tell you to do different things. So if the army book said that a unit's AS couldn't be modified by S, then you would play that. Otherwise you would follow the rules...

You're a sore loser in this argument FlinItNow
the rules are very clear in this case, no BotWD against Black Horror as it doesn't cause any wounds, same as no BotWD against KB / HKB (except of course if you have a rule that makes you ignore KB / HKB) as you could save the wound caused by the 6, but not the "secondary" effect triggered by the 6 because that effect isn't causing any wounds, just "slaying you outright"

Not being a sore loser, just illustrating I was trying to argue for the actual rules not just the RaW. Niteware convinced me of a ruling in another thread and I thanked him for it. Again I understand how the KB argument works but I would be surprised to see anyone actually play it that way. I don't play HE so don't have a vested interest in this working, but the intent seems clear to me.

As for HIWPI, I would let my opponent take the ward, but point out that this wasn't RAW - unless it was a competitive game, where I think rules should be followed.