Hi,

The blurb for Rune of the true beast specifies "monsters" (i.e. by the letter, treemen are viable targets) but is very clearly intended to counter flesh and blood "beasts" such as horses, dragons, hounds, etc, etc.

To date I've not played RotTB against my friend's wood elves because I suspect the following:

BoC: I attack your treeman and he can do nothing because my character has RotTB
WE: Er...really? What are the rules for that?
BoC: *Recites rules*
WE: Well, I would say you can't use it against a treeman because it's clearly for use against animals, and that's a tree.
BoC: Yes, but...
WE: It's a TREE.

Cue interpretative debate.

I would like to use RotTB in my next game, specifically for going up against his treeman. Has anyone ever found themselves in this situation? How did you resolve it?

Thanks!
Grimfeed

The treeman is a monster, and should be treated like a monster. If the Rune said something like "this affects all monsters except those made of wood ('cause they're witches)" he'd have had a case, but not now.
Undead are not immune to Poison, because they don't have a "Immune to Poison" rule.
Warhounds are treated as Cavalry, even though they're not ridden.
Et c.

Ok - thanks :D

Against the Treeman Ancient the Rune would be useless as the Ancient is both a monster and a character. The FAQ says that the rune does not work against monsters that are also characters.

Now I know what mrtn really stands for:

monty python
references are
totally
necessary (in every post)

mrtn is right though, a treeman is a monster by the rules, so it is treated as such by ROTB.

Just remember that it stops the treeman to DIRECT attacks against RotTB, so if the wielder is in a unit the unit is gonna get it instead.

Excellent - thanks everyone. Looks like my dastardly plan is rule-proof and fool-proof.