Latest posts for the thread "Daemonic Attacks"

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

It states in DoC that all Daemonic Attacks including special rules, are magic. Does that apply to Killing Blow and Poison?

It's kind of odd, but the BRB lists Poison Attacks as specifically not working on attacks made by magic weapons, but the Plaguesword IS a magic weapon with Poison Attacks.

So the questions are kind of:

-If an Ethereal model is KB'd (by any unit, not just DoC) does the KB have to come from a magic source for them to die?
-Does Poison Attacks work on the magic weapons (Daemonic Gifts) of DoC?

And...

-Does Banner of the World Lol, give it's 2+ ward against KB and Poison Attacks wounds caused by, say, Bloodletters and Plaguebearers? The KB example is especially tricky because it's not doing wounds, it's outright killing. But you can take a ward save to prevent it. AND daemonic attacks says all special rules are magic. But is there such a thing as a magic KB? Just like is there such a thing as magic...strider? Is there ever a need for that combination? If Ethereal could only be KB'd by a magic KB, I would say yes. But I'm not sure that's the case.

Daemonic Attacks

phatonic — GMT

As for the last question, Yes they would get their 2+ lolmatt ward save even if it's poisoned or killinblow, any magic dealt with a model having Magical attacks (this case deamonic) will affect all the other affects aswell unless stated in the named special rule in the BRB, wich in this case sadly does not :/

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

Well it does state it under Poison Attacks. And KB doesn't do wounds. Just like you don't get a save vs. Final Transmutation. KB is just a single version of that. But KB does allow for a ward save.

Magic attacks are one thing, but the KB splits off to its own rules. So my litmus is kind of, can an Ethereal model be killed with a non-magic KB? Like from an Ogre Gorger. Or would it bounce off?

Daemonic Attacks

phatonic — GMT

Q: What are ‘magical attacks’? (p68)
A: All attacks made by spells and magic items are considered
to be magical attacks,as are all attacks that are specifically
noted as being magical attacks. Shots fired from magical items
are also considered to be magical attacks, unless their
description specifically states otherwise. Hits inflicted by rolls
on the Miscast table are treated as magical attacks.

Doesnt state wounds but attacks as i assume roll to hit.

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

But that is not the source. The source is a special rule, Poison Attacks and Killing Blow. A roll simply initiates those.

By your logic if Daemons caused other Daemons or Undead to fail instability, it would be magic, because at some point rolls were...rolled. I don't think that's the case.

Daemonic Attacks

Niteware — GMT

BRB only limts poisoned attacks from magic weapons, not magic attacks in general.

Daemonic Attacks

phatonic — GMT

Good to know.. go go go plague!

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

Niteware wrote:
BRB only limts poisoned attacks from magic weapons, not magic attacks in general.

I already wrote this... Plaguesword is what gives Plaguebearers poison attacks. It is a magic weapon.

Daemonic Attacks

EagleArk — GMT

As far as i know the plague sword is worded as attacks made by a model with a plague sword, have poisoned attacks, not that the weapon simply has the poisoned special rule.

But dont quote me on that.

Daemonic Attacks

Niteware — GMT

And giving poisoned attacks doesn't make it a magic weapon, else no weapon with poisoned attacks would work.

Daemonic Attacks

HawaiiMatt — GMT

Killing blow would have to come from magic to whack an ethereal. Killing blow is a function of wounding, and you cannot be wounded by non-magical if ethereal. Just like normally a "6" always wounds. Ethereal trumps that with cannot be wounded.

Poison attacks granted by a magic weapon is a rules glitch.
Strict RAW:
Model gains poison attacks from magic sword.
Model must fight with magic sword.
Poison USR doesn't apply to attacks made with magic weapons.
Model would have poison shooting attacks, but plague bearers do not have a shooting attack.

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

Niteware wrote:
And giving poisoned attacks doesn't make it a magic weapon, else no weapon with poisoned attacks would work.

The plagueblade IS a magic weapon. It says it with the unambiguous wording of "magic weapon."

Killing blow would have to come from magic to whack an ethereal. Killing blow is a function of wounding, and you cannot be wounded by non-magical if ethereal. Just like normally a "6" always wounds. Ethereal trumps that with cannot be wounded.

I'm going to RAW disagree with that. You're right that Ethereal can't be wounded by non-magic and KB comes from rolling on the to-wound table. But those aren't mutually-exclusive. People usually don't bother rolling on the to-wound table (or to-hit table) because they can't ultimately wound. But if I had to say where the rules Stop comes in it would be a flow of:

roll to hit
if hit
roll to wound
if KB, KB rules
if wound can't wound Ethereal cuz not magic

Ethereal doesn't say don't roll on the wound table, it says they can't be wounded, that implies a results of the to-wound table, whose results have been bypassed. KB doesn't cause a wound per se. It slays.

Daemonic Attacks

kirsanth — GMT

My mind is blown.

I am going to have to re-read all this now.

Thank you DukeRustfield.

Daemonic Attacks

BooMeRLiNSKi — GMT

DukeRustfield wrote:
Ethereal doesn't say don't roll on the wound table, it says they can't be wounded,

If it can't be wounded by the attack, why would you roll on the wound table? You don't make a roll for something that can't happen.

that implies a results of the to-wound table

Erm... no it doesn't

KB doesn't cause a wound per se. It slays.

No it most definitely does cause a wound, it causes a wound in every single way, that wound was a killing wound.

My mind is also blown... but only in the sense that I am flabbergasted that anybody could come to this very obviously wrong conclusion.

If it isn't magical it cannot hit, wound, hurt, perturb, irritate or otherwise inconvenience it in any way, it's quite simple.

Daemonic Attacks

HawaiiMatt — GMT

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:
DukeRustfield wrote:
Ethereal doesn't say don't roll on the wound table, it says they can't be wounded,

If it can't be wounded by the attack, why would you roll on the wound table? You don't make a roll for something that can't happen.

that implies a results of the to-wound table

Erm... no it doesn't

KB doesn't cause a wound per se. It slays.

No it most definitely does cause a wound, it causes a wound in every single way, that wound was a killing wound.

My mind is also blown... but only in the sense that I am flabbergasted that anybody could come to this very obviously wrong conclusion.

If it isn't magical it cannot hit, wound, hurt, perturb, irritate or otherwise inconvenience it in any way, it's quite simple.

Actually, you can hit. You can't wound. In 6th or 7th edition, we did have an enchanted item that took place on a hit, which could be non-magical. Current, we don't have any non-magical effects that take place on a hit, but if we did, then they would trigger.

-Matt

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:

If it can't be wounded by the attack, why would you roll on the wound table? You don't make a roll for something that can't happen.

Because the rules state that is how close combat attacks happen. Nowhere does it say you don't roll to wound because ____. There are phases of close combat you follow. The very end of which Ethereal simply trumps. It is a convenience that players take out the preceding steps.

that implies a results of the to-wound table

Erm... no it doesn't

Yes it does. Because the determination of a wound can only come from a to-wound roll on the to-wound table after a hit on the to-hit table. Nowhere in the close combat section does it say, "check for Ethereal before rolling."

No it most definitely does cause a wound, it causes a wound in every single way, that wound was a killing wound.

It would have to say, causes a wound or some such for it to, you know, cause wounds. You are making up verbiage that does not exist. There is no "killing wound." The wording is, "automatically slays his opponent--regardless of the number of wounds on the victim's profile." Much like Dwellers, Final Transmutation or such. It doesn't say causes wounds that are slaying. All wounds do that. This is different than poison, which specifically causes a wound.

If it isn't magical it cannot hit, wound, hurt, perturb, irritate or otherwise inconvenience it in any way, it's quite simple.

Nowhere does it say cannot hit, hurt, perturb, irritate, or otherwise inconvenience. You made all of that up. Find one comment anywhere that says you cannot hit Ethereal and repost it. They still crumble due to Unstable, so they can be wounded by non-magic. They still suffer from Fear/Terror which is being "perturbed/irritated." I'm not sure how a unit giving them Stupidity (Ogre overtyrant) would work, but it would do something. O&G Skarsnik could prevent them from being deployed, which is certainly inconvenient--it does not prevent their movement, as they are undeployed and have none. So all of the above is wrong.

Another angle is this. If a unit has Flaming Attacks that aren't magic and they attack an Ethereal unit that has Regeneration, you're saying the attacks can't even roll. Don't get the chance. They go to the Roll To Hit phase of Close Combat in the BRB and there is an invisible section that says: except not if Ethereal. It's certainly not under the special rule or any of the FAQs I've seen. RAW you can still hit Ethereal, it would have to say you can't for you to not be able to.

Daemonic Attacks

BooMeRLiNSKi — GMT

DukeRustfield wrote:
Because the rules state that is how close combat attacks happen.

They don't happen. You cannot harm an ethereal creature with your attacks unless they are magical. If your KB or poisoned attack is magical, then it can harm them. If your KB or poison attack is magical it does trigger a ward from the BotWD. Attacks from Daemons are magical, KB and Poison attacks from Daemons are magical.

Yes it does. Because the determination of a wound can only come from a to-wound roll on the to-wound table after a hit on the to-hit table. Nowhere in the close combat section does it say, "check for Ethereal before rolling."

It also doesn't tell you not to pull out your Johnson before you take a whiz, not to soil yourself in public or use a cheese grater to exfoliate your face.

You are making up verbiage that does not exist. There is no "killing wound." The wording is, "automatically slays his opponent--regardless of the number of wounds on the victim's profile."

No, you are taking pedantry to new eye rolling heights whilst still be able to ignore the relevant part that counters what you are trying to make a poor case for in your own quote "regardless of the number of wounds on the victim's profile" which you can easily take (and should) as meaning doing all remaining wounds.

If it isn't magical it cannot hit, wound, hurt, perturb, irritate or otherwise inconvenience it in any way, it's quite simple.

Nowhere does it say cannot hit, hurt, perturb, irritate, or otherwise inconvenience. You made all of that up.

You

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

The book

Now are you going to sit here and now try and claim that Killing blow or poison causes no wounds?

They still crumble due to Unstable, so they can be wounded by non-magic.

Who says instability is non magical? Undead creatures losing their magical grip on this world... seems pretty magical to me.

They still suffer from Fear/Terror which is being "perturbed/irritated."

Undead Ethereal are ItP, so only if it's magical.

I'm not sure how a unit giving them Stupidity (Ogre overtyrant) would work, but it would do something. O&G Skarsnik could prevent them from being deployed, which is certainly inconvenient--it does not prevent their movement, as they are undeployed and have none. So all of the above is wrong.

I was going to reply to all these "points" and then I wondered why... yes... there are units that have special rules that do things aren't there?

Another angle is this. If a unit has Flaming Attacks that aren't magic and they attack an Ethereal unit that has Regeneration, you're saying the attacks can't even roll.

If they are flaming and not magical then they get to do nothing to ethereal creatures as they cannot wound them and therefore cannot strip them of their regeneration save.

Really, this is sowing confusion where none exists.

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:

They don't happen. You cannot harm an ethereal creature with your attacks unless they are magical.

There is no rule that says that. "Harm" is not a game condition nor is it ever used. You will find the game tends to use game terms which have game meanings.

No, you are taking pedantry to new eye rolling heights whilst still be able to ignore the relevant part that counters what you are trying to make a poor case for in your own quote "regardless of the number of wounds on the victim's profile" which you can easily take (and should) as meaning doing all remaining wounds.

No, the game states very clearly when it DOES WOUNDS and when it CAUSES HITS. Those are game terms. Because specific items and actions key off of them. Charmed shield, which I had just looked up, keys off of hits. The elfy crown keys off of hits that wound. Spririt Leech does not cause a hit, it causes a wound, so it was FAQed that charmed shield cannot block it. The only other place they use the word slay is Purple Sun. KB slays. Ethereal makes no mention of slay, it says wound, which encompasses nearly everything. KB says regardless of wounds. Regardless means without regard to. That's quite different than taking direct action against. Even if Ethereal didn't have a weakness to spells, Purple sun could still kill them, same with Final Trans, Dwellers, etc. Because they don't cause wounds. They DOOM or slay or remove from play--just like KB.

Who says instability is non magical? Undead creatures losing their magical grip on this world... seems pretty magical to me.

The special rule says so. I'm glad you find it magical. But it's not. The easy way to tell is if it says....wait for it....magic attack.

You seem to put a lot of new adverbs and conditions on special abilities that aren't there, like harm and hinder and inconvenience. There is nothing stating the rules you have made up. It is not written anywhere. I've asked where it says you cannot roll to hit or roll to wound vs. Ethereal if non-magic. What page or what FAQ does that rule occur on? Quote it, please. If you can't, then I got whole big sections of the BRB that says you can.

Daemonic Attacks

BooMeRLiNSKi — GMT

DukeRustfield wrote:
Blah blah blah loads of irrelevant missing the point

Question: Does killing blow roll to wound?

I'll await your answer....

Daemonic Attacks

EagleArk — GMT

I find the irony on this forum quite funny sometimes...

Re:Daemonic Attacks

pities2004 — GMT

Spoiler:

Daemonic Attacks

Saldiven — GMT

DukeRustfield wrote:
Even if Ethereal didn't have a weakness to spells, Purple sun could still kill them, same with Final Trans, Dwellers, etc. Because they don't cause wounds. They DOOM or slay or remove from play--just like KB.

I'm not sure if you've considered this, Duke, but if your interpretation is correct, there are some interesting extrapolations.

For example, if KB doesn't cause wounds, per se, then models "removed" by KB attacks in Close Combat would not contribute towards Combat Resolution.

Daemonic Attacks

Niteware — GMT

Which they do - you count all the wounds remaining. Which suggests that KB did that many wounds.

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:

Question: Does killing blow roll to wound?

The BRB says you do, so of course. Ethereal does not in any way, shape, form prevent you from Rolling. There is no effect of Rolling. There is an effect of succeeding on the table. Which Ethereal negates per its language. If a weapon automatically wounds or hits (or misses), you wouldn't roll. Ethereal doesn't say the enemy automatically fails to-wound rolls. It just says they cannot be wounded by____. I guess here's another example, Charmed shield blocks the first hit. If an ethereal hero had a charmed shield, it would block the first hit, regardless of whether that hit had the potential to wound him. That's the difference in game steps. Hit roll, hit result (i.e., a Hit), wound roll, a Wound. The charmed shield doesn't have any language to say, "hold up and wait to see if the hit can hurt you." It blocks the first hit and is a wasted block. Ethereal blocks wounds caused. No language says it blocks hit rolls, hits, wound rolls.

If you blast stuff with Purple Sun you get the life leeching effects of losing their wounds even though you never WOUNDED a single model. They do this in a number of places. Red Fury. Lizardman Blade of Realities. Basically any save or die weapon, a number of which occur in close combat.

Dur, but I knew I had seen this. Bottom of page 52, "attacks that kill a model outright (made with killing blow, say -- see page 72) count has having scored all the model's remaining wounds"

Kill a model outright. Slay. That is the verbiage applied to KB. I do not see counter language under Ethereal.

Daemonic Attacks

Niteware — GMT

DukeRustfield wrote:

Dur, but I knew I had seen this. Bottom of page 52, "attacks that kill a model outright (made with killing blow, say -- see page 72) count has having scored all the model's remaining wounds"

Kill a model outright. Slay. That is the verbiage applied to KB. I do not see counter language under Ethereal.

Did you read your quote from the BRB? "count as having scored all the model's remaining wounds". How can you argue that isn't wounding?

Daemonic Attacks

Warpsolution — GMT

Niteware wrote:
Did you read your quote from the BRB? "count as having scored all the model's remaining wounds". How can you argue that isn't wounding?

Because it says "count as". That means that, while we treat it as wounding, it is not and cannot be wounding.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BooMeRLiNSKi wrote:
DukeRustfield wrote:
Blah blah blah loads of irrelevant missing the point

Question: Does killing blow roll to wound?

I'll await your answer....

1. Please don't alter other posts when you quote them.
2. I think there's some misunderstanding here. This is You Make Da Call, the most ruthless and literal of rules forums.
Duke isn't trying to twist the rules to serve his purposes; in his next game against a Daemon player, he's not going to say "oh hey, your Plague Bearer's attacks aren't magical/poisoned/whatever". He's just pointing out some weird grammar-stuff. There's a lot of that sort of thing 'round these parts. Like our discussion about Armour Piercing and how it can never be applied to ranged attacks. It's not to use in games, it's to get a better understanding of the game, and to have some fun trying to puzzle out what, exactly, is being said.
3. As to the actual argument:

Killing Blow does not actually cause wounds. Obviously, the designers had such an idea in mind. But Da Rules currently say otherwise. None of us are going to play it that way; it's just a precision exercise.
If you still disagree, I think your best argument would be to try and find clear evidence that Killing Blow causes wounds, that "cannot be wounded by" = "don't roll to wound", or the like. The more quotes you can pick from the book, the better.

Let's all play nice.

Daemonic Attacks

Niteware — GMT

I would moot that the fact you can ward save KB means that it is wounds, as oppossed to doom, which is no aaves of any kind.

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

You can't armor or regen, so that's 2 that say otherwise. But the text of KB doesn't say it, the text of combat resolution doesn't say it regarding KB and there's a section called Instant Kills on page 44 that starts:

"some special attacks don't inflict wounds, but require models to be removed as casualties..."

It goes on to say how to treat it and that some saves can be specified. That is exactly KB and HKB as they are the only special rules who do that. None of the doom spells do.

So there's at least three areas in the BRB that are consistent on specifically saying it doesn't inflict wounds. Haven't seen any that are otherwise.

Re:Daemonic Attacks

HawaiiMatt — GMT

From the FAQ:

Q: If a warmachine is attacked by a model with the Heroic Killing Blow special rule, and the attacker rolls a 6 to wound,
are all remaining wounds on the war machine lost?
(p72)
A:Yes.

If all remaining wounds are lost, isn't that inflicting wounds?

-Matt

Daemonic Attacks

Saldiven — GMT

DukeRustfield wrote:
You can't armor or regen, so that's 2 that say otherwise. But the text of KB doesn't say it, the text of combat resolution doesn't say it regarding KB and there's a section called Instant Kills on page 44 that starts:

"some special attacks don't inflict wounds, but require models to be removed as casualties..."

It goes on to say how to treat it and that some saves can be specified. That is exactly KB and HKB as they are the only special rules who do that. None of the doom spells do.

So there's at least three areas in the BRB that are consistent on specifically saying it doesn't inflict wounds. Haven't seen any that are otherwise.

Ok, so, let's take all of that as gospel.

Would you then agree that since Killing Blow does not cause wounds that any models removed by Killing Blow in a close combat would not add to the Combat Resolution score?

Because that is the logical extension of your interpretation.

Edit:

Also, since wounds are not caused, then Ward Saves would not be eligible, either, as those saves can only be taken against wounds.

Daemonic Attacks

Niteware — GMT

1. You can't armour save or regen against the helzfire sword. It wounds.
2. The instant kills section in page 44 specifically talks about taking a test or ld with no saves of any kind = doom spells, does not = kb.
3. As noted, you can only ward save wounds and you can ward kb (unlike doom spells which do not wound)

Daemonic Attacks

DukeRustfield — GMT

Saldiven wrote:
Would you then agree that since Killing Blow does not cause wounds that any models removed by Killing Blow in a close combat would not add to the Combat Resolution score?

Also, since wounds are not caused, then Ward Saves would not be eligible, either, as those saves can only be taken against wounds.

Dude, read the whole thread. Or at least a few posts up. The BRB specifically mentions KB in combat resolution. And Ward saves specifically have a box about Instant Kills where they mention there are no saves "unless specified." A special rule can say anything it wants, that's why it's special. If a Bomb of Snooderbutt is thrown at you, it can auto wound and have no saves except Regen -2. It would be rather weird, but if they feel like writing that they can.

1. You can't armour save or regen against the helzfire sword. It wounds.
2. The instant kills section in page 44 specifically talks about taking a test or ld with no saves of any kind = doom spells, does not = kb.
3. As noted, you can only ward save wounds and you can ward kb (unlike doom spells which do not wound)

1. instant wounds can be armor saved/regenned unless it says you can't. Any wounds can.
2. It says for example. It doesn't limit it to that. And it says saves can be taken if specified, NONE of the doom spells do that so it's clearly not limited to that. And the language is super similar to KB: instant kills, slain automatically; number of wounds...irrelevant, regardless of the number of wounds. You're going to have a tough time saying that box applies to just spells and not KB, as it has language of both straight down the line, as well as other weapons that are instant kill.
3. You can ward save whatever they tell you to ward save. In KB it doesn't say you ward save wounds, it says you ward save damage. In the instant kills box it says you can take no saves "unless specified otherwise." That means any save they choose. Wards are just the big daddy saves and thus most likely to be used. But an attribute test is also a kind of save considering no wound is done.