[Necrons] Death Ray number of hits question

[Morgan Darkstar]

What spoke for itself, the rule?

Apparently not very well, as it needed to be changed.

[Hive Mind]

An Errata that changes the wording of the rule so that it says to morons what smarter people said it said all along.

++censored by the inquisition++

The problem with your 'method' of interpretation Bean ol' love is that while you are just smart enough to have acquired a little bit of knowledge, you are not smart enough to realise that the little knowledge you possess is totally inadequate on its own and so you keep trying to decide issues without full possession of relevant factors.

To someone who looks only at the language of a rule, this could be problematic as we have seen. To someone who looks at the bigger picture and considers analogous precedent, logic and all other relevant factors it is not in question. One leads to posting half-baked ideas and one leads to posting the correct response first time.

Apply your major and figure out which one is you and which one is me, my old fruit.

What spoke for itself, the rule?

Apparently not very well, as it needed to be changed.

No, simply that I was correct. Again.

[Bean]

An Errata that changes the wording of the rule so that it says to morons what smarter people said it said all along. You will, of course, have applied your cow college Third and used your no doubt unimpeachable skills to note that I did in fact agree that the wording may be ambiguous but said that the rule was in no way ambiguous.

The problem with your 'method' of interpretation Bean ol' love is that while you are just smart enough to have acquired a little bit of knowledge, you are not smart enough to realise that the little knowledge you possess is totally inadequate on its own and so you keep trying to decide issues without full possession of relevant factors.

To someone who looks only at the language of a rule, this could be problematic as we have seen. To someone who looks at the bigger picture and considers analogous precedent, logic and all other relevant factors it is not in question. One leads to posting half-baked ideas and one leads to posting the correct response first time.

Apply your major and figure out which one is you and which one is me, my old fruit.

See what I mean? You do all my work for me.

Thanks! =)

[Morgan Darkstar]

To someone who looks only at the language of a rule, this could be problematic as we have seen. To someone who looks at the bigger picture and considers analogous precedent, logic and all other relevant factors it is not in question.

You see the problem I have with this statement is that 40k is a game, more specifically a game children should be able to play.

therefore the rules should be taken as they are, you shouldn't need a degree to fathom them.

[Bean]

You don't need a degree. Bean claims to have a degree and still can't fathom them. You just need half a brain.

You've gotten confused again.

I called every detail of this, basically. I pointed out the ambiguity in the language, suggested that it would be errata-ed--I even correctly called the change in the language that the errata would use.

At every turn, I have been correct on this one. All of my assertions have been validated to the greatest extent any such assertion can be.

++ Edited by the inquisition; insults are not tolerated++

[Morgan Darkstar]

++ Edited by the inquisition; insults are not tolerated++

Aww. I want to know what it said.

[Hive Mind]

I want to know why my posts containing insults have been left unaltered and why the one that did not contain any insults was deleted.

[Immortal]

I'll be sure to find and delete your other posts that contain insulting language. As for posts that i edited or have already deleted by either you or Bean, they all contained insults or language that could be seen as such.
Continue your debate in a civil fashion or this thread will be closed and I'll put you both in time out.

-Immortal

[Bean]

I'll be sure to find and delete your other posts that contain insulting language. As for posts that i edited or have already deleted by either you or Bean, they all contained insults or language that could be seen as such.
Continue your debate in a civil fashion or this thread will be closed and I'll put you both in time out.

-Immortal

I don't think there's actually any debate left--just us poking at each other. And, amusing as that has been, I'm basically done.

[lattd]

I want to know how bean knows that his predicted change is correct when we do not have an errata yet?