Help support TMP


"Magical attacks in Warhammer Fantasy Battle 3rd Ed" Topic


8 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not post offers to buy and sell on the main forum.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Warhammer Message Board


Areas of Interest

Fantasy

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

Eureka Amazon Project: Nude Phalangites

More figures for the 28mm Amazon army!


Featured Profile Article

Video Musical: El Héroe Solitario

Our alternate Spanish version is more popular than the original!


1,199 hits since 24 Jan 2012
©1994-2026 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Smiler24 Jan 2012 12:23 p.m. PST

As I have now made the move towards building armies and hopefully find opponents as time goes by, for the 3rd edition of this game, I decided to read the rules.

I have found something that has caused me some confusion. In the bestiary section of the rule book it is clear that Daemons and Ethereal creatures can only be affected by magical weapon attacks. Further to this it states that Ethereal creatures are not affected by Battle Magic, Demonic, Elemental or Illusionist spells but are affected by Necromatic spells.

However on page 148 Undead, Ethereal creatures, Demons and Elementals are classed as magically vunerable creatures and cannot avoid the effects of magic and have no magical save.

Then….In the 'Warhammer Armies' book there are a number of ammendments and on page 12 there are some ammendments/clarifications in regards magical attacks. Basically if I am reading this, and the given example, correctly it is saying that all these creatures can be affected by all spells.

So to those of you still playing this edition…Am I right?

Chef Lackey Rich Fezian24 Jan 2012 12:45 p.m. PST

Ethereals were always vulnerable to magic of all types when I was playing regularly. Considering the design studio lads actually ran a game that way at the local store on one of their few US whistle-stop tours, I don't think we were doing it wrong.

GW was such a different company in the 80's.

Mithmee24 Jan 2012 11:47 p.m. PST

Yup, it was better back then and some of actually like them.

Unlike today were we hatez them.

Space Monkey25 Jan 2012 2:53 a.m. PST

I haven't played with Ethereals as yet but I've been collecting my way up to a small unit of wights so I went and read up on them… and yeah, that seems to be the gist of what's written. It's just wrong in that one place it seems.

So much fun stuff in that book… but a bit hard to find things sometimes. It could do with a nice bookmarked PDF.

weazil28 Jan 2012 4:53 p.m. PST

Hi Vermintrude

I agree with the consensus here – it looks like you ran into one of the idiosyncrasies of Warhammer 3 – no editiing :)

If we were being legalistic (of course, we're all adults, so no need for that here, but lets pretend), then I would say the Armies book takes precedence, because it has errata and rules that supercede the main rulebook in other areas too.

So, I think that the ethereals should be harmed by magic. The alternative is quite…challenging for your opponent :)

Capt Flash09 Jan 2013 4:32 p.m. PST

Hey, anyone know where there are errata online somewhere? I'm waiting on 3rd edition to arrive and having them would be nice…

Achtung Minen09 Jan 2013 11:54 p.m. PST

Your gamemaster is your errata! If I were running it, I would say that ethereal were vulnerable to magic too, though.

Capt Flash10 Jan 2013 2:00 p.m. PST

True, but otherwise an errata would be great.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.